Response to Chapter 5: "We Can All be Super Heroes"

I think there are some plausible points that Beckett brings up during this chapter. Journalism has begun to shift and with new technological advances, journalism needs to find different methods and outlets. Basic investigative journalism can no longer be taught and Beckett illustrates this point by stating “media literacy courses will have to teach about citizen journalist and how to work them”. The main reason for this is because due to blogging and social networks, the public is beginning to become the journalists; hence, the professionals need to know how to interact with this shift.

Ethnic diversity should play a role in journalism based on certain topics. If the journalist is reporting on hard news, then there should be no reason for diversity and biases should be excluded from the piece. On the other hand, if the article is soft news, then ethnic diversity should be illustrated within the work because; soft news usually targets certain specific groups of people. With that said, I think it would be agreeable to state that the public rather than a certain individual should collectively write certain news pieces. If there is a controversial topic, it is hard for an individual to not portray biased or “framed” opinions. Therefore, if the public interacts with one another and draws different ideas, it brings ethnic diversity and a stronger understanding to the topic.

I do not believe there is a right or wrong way to view news. People have different views and with that said, they will consistently look at news through different lenses. Some people may find news as an entertainment source, while others find it strictly informative. The goal for news is to share important information to the public and how people digest it differs from person to person.

As regards to the question about PR shifting the world of journalism and the effects it has, I believe it to be both positive and negative. Due to the shift, the only way for the world of journalism to stay afloat would be to join “the dark side of journalism”. However, it does not mean that journalism as we know it has completely disappeared, it has just altered certain aspects to adjust to the change. I do not believe that it is possible to teach fairness and transparency to citizen journalist because, the main reason a person would become a citizen journalist is if they have an opinion or certain view on a particular topic. To play off of that, “e-democracy” would be very hard to obtain because people are going to constantly have different views and challenge one another.

Transition Phase

Response

Although presenting information suggesting that journalism is going through a transition phase, Shirky does not make a prediction for what will be the replacement of print journalism in the future. In response to Kacey’s question pertaining the transition period of journalism, I agree with Shirky in the sense that now is the time for ‘experiments’. Shirky cites how innovations like Craigslist, Wikipedia, and Octavolumes were formulated through experimentation in the transformation period. By listing the beneficiaries of print journalism (politicians, district attorneys, radio hosts and bloggers) in then presenting the high expenses of printing presses, a sense of urgency is evoked among the audience. “The old stuff (printing presses) gets broken faster than the new stuff is put in its place.” If print journalism is forced to foreclose due to a lack of income before a replacement is invented than I think a chain of negative economic events will ensue, affecting politicians, radio hosts, bloggers etc (all beneficiaries of print journalism). This is why digital journalist innovators must keep experimenting until they find a solution just as a one was found in 1500 with the invention of print.

In regard to the micropayment question, I do think newspapers are doing the right thing by experimenting with ways to turn a profit online, however I don’t think micropayment will mark the end of the transition phase because instead of paying for online newspapers, people will turn to other news outlets like blogging, and word of mouth. The unthinkable scenario, which is the notion of people sharing information through the internet, has become print journalisms biggest nightmare.

In response to the third question, I think newspapers will become extinct due to the high expenses of print. The New York Times for example, is anticipating prints disappearance which is why they have invented the CustomTimes. The CustomTImes is the New York Times, but instead of paper its on your phone and television. Pending 'experimentation' with the public, things like the CustomTimes will replace newspapers.

1) If a replacement for print journalism is not found, and print presses become to expensive to keep running, than should micropayments be installed for blogging web sites so that the beneficiaries of print journalism don’t feel the effects?

2) What will surface first, prints extinction or the end of the transition period?

Newspapers and Thinking the Unthinkable

Clay Shirky’s article “Newspapers and Thinking the Unthinkable” outlines some of the major problems newspapers and journalism are facing today. Shirky outlines the history of newspapers, the recent history leading up to the internet, the present, and the future of newspapers. Throughout the article, Shirky describes ways journalists thought they would deal with the Internet, and then the “unthinkable” scenario. According to Shirky, the “unthinkable” scenario regarding newspapers and the evolution of the internet is that “The ability to share content wouldn’t shrink, it would grow.”

During the 1990’s before the explosion and widespread usage of the internet, many journalists came up with ideas on how to integrate themselves with the internet. The problem with these ideas were that none of them were taking into account the fact that the entire system may shift online, not just certain aspects. Some ideas journalists came up with to protect their industry included educating people on copyright laws, making software more coveted, paying for usage and even more harsh, suing for copyright infringers. While all of these options seemed plausible, they were missing one key option that could ensue: The Unthinkable Scenario.

The Unthinkable Scenario suggests that rules and regulations regarding the Internet aforementioned would not work, and that content sharing and usage would become the normal. This scenario virtually wipes out the entire print media industry. This unthinkable scenario appears to becoming reality.

Shirky draws a parallel between the invention of the printing press in 1500 and what is happening today to journalism. He notes that Elizabeth Eisenstein noticed that many historians ignored the actual transition from before the printing press to after the printing press was developed. She ponders, “How did we get from the world before the printing press to the world after it? What was the revolution itself like?” Shirky goes on to mention that the revolution was chaotic, and it was not a smooth transition to the printing press.

Ironically, today we face a similar revolution: the dissolution of the printing press. The biggest problem with print journalism today is the fact that printing presses are obscenely expensive and time consuming to run. While in the near future, printing press will still hold some responsibility, such as “flooding the zone-covering every angle of a huge story-to the daily grind of attending the City Council meeting, just in case.”

In relation to the expenses of the printing press, from an economic standpoint, the newspaper business is dwindling. One particular way Shirky talks about this is with his quote “ ‘Your gonna miss us when were gone!’ Has never been much of a business model.” The newspapers don’t know what to do or who exactly is covering the news currently.

According to Shirky, we are living through 1500 again, in the transition period. There are many unknowns in what is going on with newspapers, “now is the time for experiments” he states. However, while there may be ups and downs on what is going on, concern and panic shouldn’t occur because, at the end of the day only one thing matters: journalism. “Society doesn’t need newspapers. What we need is journalism.”

I think Shirky outlines important points in this article. While journalists, and society alike should be somewhat concerned because we don't know what is coming in the future, instead of worry we should experiment with this new age, and sift through what works and what doesn't work in the new media. While the result of this revolution may leave print newspapers behind, in the long-run journalism as a whole will be stronger, and society will benefit because of it.

-Check out bestselling author Seth Godin's viewpoint on the disappearance of newspapers here.

-Global perspective of the U.S. mainstream media from Russia Today on You Tube.

-Here is a brief yet concise You Tube video from freelance journalist Michael Stroud discussing the future of print newspapers.

Questions for discussion:

1.Do you think things will settle in the new media like it did after the invention and establishment of the printing press? Or, have we reached an age of technology where things will constantly be changing, and we will be in a constant transition period?

2.Do you think a micropayment system such as Itunes could eventually work successfully for online newspapers?

3. Economically speaking, do you think journalism can prosper?

Chapter 5: "We can all be Superheros"

In his final chapter, Beckett talks about the future of journalism and how the public is becoming greatly apart of the news media and the media in general. The idea of a global community is becoming less of a myth and more of a reality with the birth of the Internet and new media. One example of this is Wikipedia. Instead of following the strict rules and guidelines of an encyclopedia, information is constantly being corrected and added by individuals free of charge. Beckett writes, “the wiki principle takes advantage of software to allow a collective version of reality to be produced.” He says that both the encyclopedia, and obviously Wikipedia both make mistakes, however Wikipedia entries are constantly being corrected. Wikipedia is also another example of what Beckett describes as a blurring of lines between the journalist and the amateur. He argues that anyone can seemingly be a network journalist, or an investigative journalist if he/she has the tools. With blogs, interactive videos on Youtube, and with Internet usage on most newer cell phones, it seems as if Beckett might be on to something. He also brings up the idea of editorial diversity. This term refers to how journalists today need to focus more on catering to the audience and what they want almost as much as reporting on a story itself. When Beckett says that we have a diverse audience, he is talking about how the public has many different interests, and with the Internet we can “have multiple identities facilitated by new media and technologies.” He also argues that typically journalists today are of one particular demographic, and this is a problem because it causes certain minority groups to feel left out, or not feel as if journalism and the mainstream media are for them. Beckett believes that media colleges need to focus on attracting more of a diverse student population because, “it is in the self-interest of the news media to employ a variety of people who will connect with the various audiences.” Beckett adds on to the idea of a changing educational background in journalism by conjoining it more with business schools. The media lines have blurred because all of these tools that help us connect cater to a more informed and connected audience. Because of this, journalism is slowly becoming not much different from PR and marketing. Porter Novelli is a good example of how businesses, in this case a PR firm, have based their company’s PR techniques all using new media. Being ‘business creative’ in the journalism field is becoming a reality because with more of a diverse audience, the editor of an online publication needs to focus not only what stories to report on but also how they are laid out on a computer screen.

Questions:

Should it matter that journalists are ethnically diverse if their ultimate job is to report on news stories in a fair and unbiased way?

Beckett and Shudson have different takes on what the news should be. Beckett believes that it should be treated as a social good, whereas Schudson compares media to a form of entertainment. Do you believe there is a right or wrong way to view the news?

Are there certain news events/stories that should be written more collectively by the voice of the public than the control of the journalist? What are some examples?

Beckett talks about how journalism and business schools should be tied together as the media is changing, however he believes that journalism in the future will become more closely related to businesses such as PR and marketing. Do you think this is a positive or negative change?

Do you think it is possible to ‘teach the citizen journalist’ about fairness, transparency, and skepticism? Why or why not?

Is the idea of an “e-democracy” feasible?

Ch. 4) Fighting Evil: Terror, Community, and Networked Journalism

Charlie Beckett’s chapter Fighting Evil: Terror, Community, and Networked Journalism begins by laying out the general flow for his examination of the topics contained. His organization takes readers through terror, public security, and community cohesion. Beckett’s introduction, and his conclusion emphasize that the process of understanding terror requires more than knowledge of who the terrorists are and what motivates them. I really enjoy this direction because he humanizes journalism a bit in its exploration. Journalism is subject to the same morals as greater society. Beckett begins to establish that it is the media’s job to get the facts right, and when they fail to get the whole picture, they are failing the community they serve. Additionally, Beckett relates that terrorism has to take hold of the hearts and minds of members of the community it grows in. An attentive and well-informed media can curb the growth of extremist ideals by ensuring that reporting comes from both sides. Furthermore, by representing all of the diversity of a community in a fair, accurate, and thorough manner, journalism acts as a glue to hold communities together.

In talking about bias and ignorance, Beckett uses the example of Molly Campbell, or Misbah Rana, to make a point about how engrained opinions can condemn the accuracy of a report from the beginning. I think he is absolutely right, and that he cannot emphasize this point enough. So often in making judgments, or relating stories, people take a position without all of the facts. As Mona mentioned in her presentation, if you have a question about Islamic life, ask a Muslim. The papers failure to acknowledge the possibility that someone might choose to live in Pakistan over the UK is an example of an extreme failure to exercise the flexibility of worldview necessary to get things right in today’s media environment. Beckett also articulates rather eloquently that being an informed reporter is a big prerequisite to being a tough and responsible reporter. I love this statement because it reflects my feelings about good reporting to a T.

In talking a bit about community cohesion, Beckett pulls out his old discussion of fragmentation. That there is danger in people moving from the “daily-we” to the “daily-me” is undeniable. However, I do not think there is actually any risk in more and more specialized communities taking shape on the Internet. Information generation for a specialty depends on so much more than just the information within that particular specialty that there will always be a necessity, even for the most niche content providers, to collect information from other sources. An extremist website may condemn the content of a news report, but the mere mention of the news report drives my point home… they are consuming the other content as well. As long as the media can maintain a position of accuracy, fairness, and thoroughness on a diverse body of topics, there is no danger is the forming of niche markets that explore certain issues to their foundations. Media is already taking steps to ensure they maintain a position of accuracy by linking up with niche media organizations to get more specialized information on topics they may not have expertise in.

Beckett also raises the importance of news organizations needing to maintain a genuine interest in international affairs, and stresses the importance of maintaining a desire to understand those affairs as well. To deal with terrorism, Americans cannot just declare hatred against all terrorists and move on, the problem still exists. Additionally, the problem cannot be dealt with by military power alone. Americans need to gain an understanding of what terrorism is, why it exists, and what role the US plays in the wider world to even begin a thoughtful discussion. Just as condemnation of terrorism is not a solution for the people of the world, the media needs to recognize that reporting the mere existence of terrorists does little to help the world understand the reasons for their existence.

Beckett gives a pretty detailed treatment to the Danish cartoon happening. The Danish media was deliberately trying to be controversial, and extremists were deliberately trying to make an example out of them. The dilemma that Beckett discusses is not whether it was right to publish the cartoon in the first place, but whether or not to republish it for news about the events it sparked. This is a direct attack on freedom of expression; we don’t want to upset anyone now... In this case, I am okay with the fact that most organizations deigned to avoid the footage since it was widely available online, and the reaction the Muslim world had to the Danish cartoon could easily be foreseen; the comic was designed to be controversial after all. Beckett says, and I agree, that this respect given to the religion actually strengthens the media’s position should a situation arise when they must show something offensive. In an instance where the Islamic world is legitimately in the wrong, say one sect slaughters another because they worship idols, the media will be able to show a picture of the idol in controversy with their feet on firm, justifiable ground.

Finally, Beckett talks about misunderstanding Muslims. I boiled his points down to their simplest in this section. Muslims need to articulate themselves more, and the media needs to listen, learn, and relay. And, the media needs to stop trying to group the ungroup-able. Islam is not a line drawn in the sand; it is not even the sand itself; the diversities among Muslim populations are as numerous as the shapes of a snowflake, and as such, there is no way in hell anyone can make accurate generalizations about all of them.

In conclusion, and as I mentioned before, Beckett stresses that we need to understand more. To me there is no beginning or end to understanding… it is a life process. I do not think that I will ever reach a point where I understand enough. However, I do think it is a good start that we all strive for accuracy, fairness, and thoroughness in making decisions and reporting information. Taken to their terminal degree, I think that each of those traits could lead us to a pretty good world.

Questions to ponder:
Do you think reporters can just be reporters now?
Do scholarly explorations have any place in understanding/reporting?
Is breaking news the only kind of news and is there room/time for a more participatory/comprehensive exploration of the topics involved?
Is fragmentation a danger to public security and community cohesion?
As new media provides a voice to so many more of the world's population, should the mainstream media take the position of listener?

How Obama Won

Response to "How Obama Won" I definitely agree that the Obama campaigns’ use of social media and social networking was one of the several reasons why he was able to win the election. In response to how this election differed from others is also mainly because of what Obama’s campaign stood for. He became a symbol for change, and his slogan was ‘yes we can.’ Everything about him from his age, to his race, to his background, and being a democrat in contrast to a large number of American’s tired of Bush’s conservative ways proved to be a golden opportunity for a new candidate in every sense of the word to step in. The smartest thing that the Obama campaign could do was not only to emphasize the fact that Obama represents change, but also reach out to a majority of his younger voters who seemed to be more interested in him for these very reasons. It is the younger voters who are more likely to fluently use and understand social networking sites such as YouTube, Facebook, and Myspace, and Obama’s campaign made it easy and fun to keep up with his campaign throughout the busy political year. The article talks about how other candidates such as Clinton and McCain failed to use these sites, but I think in these scenarios, especially in McCain’s case, it probably didn’t seem as important to them to delve into new media sites because most of their supporters tended to be older, and more conservative in terms of what websites they go to. As an example, I know many of my friends’ fathers who were McCain supporters did not really understand what social networking sites are, let alone how to begin using them. In response to the first question on why Meghan McCain’s ‘bloggette’ failed to attract a large number of supporters I think was because everything about it aimed to a very specific, and fairly small demographic. Quoting from the article on the blog, “the bloggette site features a silhouette of a fetching woman in red high-heeled shoes.” This site probably wouldn’t be so appealing to someone who is not a middle- to upper class female who tends to lean republican already, and regularly wears makeup and heels to work.

draft

Response to SuperMedia Chapter 2

In response to Chapter 2 of SuperMedia and Elizabeth’s post, it was clear that the focus was on the continual evolution taking place within journalism. This chapter and the post look at the larger context of journalism and the fact is has experienced major shifts throughout history, even from the “coffeehouse to the newsroom”. Now however, the shift is to networked journalism and citizen reporting, which the chapter quotes Jeff Jarvis as saying, “The more journalists behave like citizens, the stronger their journalism will be.”

The example of this occurring currently that immediately came to mind for me was the recently unveiled HuffPost College, connected to The Huffington Post, a blog that we frequently discuss and examine in class. HuffPost College will be, as Ariana Huffington writes in a blog posted yesterday: “HuffPost College features voices from colleges and universities all around the country and offers a real-time snapshot of what's going on in the lives of the nation's 19 million college students -- from coverage of the latest trends and sports happenings to more serious issues such as freedom of expression on campus and the rising cost of tuition.”

The innovative blog was launched with an article featuring different faces and signs of college kids that are in debt. This is an incredible example of the moving forward capabilities of journalism discussed in Elizabeth’s post and Chapter 2. This post integrates a look at various college students in debt, as well as the ability to post your own personal story of debt in college. This kind of citizen journalism is an example of how networked journalism is different from the past. Ariana recognizes that there are a myriad of college newspapers across the country, and on this section of the Huffington Post will bridge the gap between kids and what they are commonly experiencing on their campuses.

Lastly, the post and the chapter mention the issue of trust, and I believe HuffPost College has the potential to build up trust again in the area of college journalism. This trust comes from the constant refinement of news and shining light on issues where there is not just one source in control on the issues. HuffPost College will be an incredible avenue for college students to come together across the country on common issues, discussion, and journalism.

Digital Dictatorship: The Myth of Techno-Utopia

On Saturday The Wall Street Journal ran this article on how the Internet can be an effective tool in squashing freedom. It's relevant to several of your paper topics.

"How Obama Really Did It"

"The social-networking strategy that took an obscure senator to the doors of the white house"

“How Obama Really Did It” is a relevant illustration of how journalism has shifted due to the emergence of network journalism. This article demonstrated the ability that social-networking strategies played within the 2008 election. The web site www.my.barakobama.com created in interactive network amongst the Obama supporters and created an online community that continued to expand throughout the election process. What I was able to draw from this article was the fact that the use of online tools such as, blogs, videos, and chats, dominated the election because, the Internet is now a medium used by a wide range of demographics.

I found it interesting that Obama begun to use the resources of the Internet early on during his campaign while his opponents had a difficult time catching up. Hilary Clinton and John McCain focused on the older generations and Obama targeted people of all ages and communicated with them based on their preferred communication channels. The article stated that “ the world is now caught up with the technology,” and Obama exhibited this by sending his supporters information by text messages, blogs, e-mails and other various resources. By doing this, it enabled many people to volunteer for his campaign that not only donated millions of dollars to the campaign, but also created viral support based on different communication channels. A clear demonstration of this is the viral YouTube video “Crush on Obama” by Obama Girl, that has been viewed almost 17 million times since the election. Obama girl received national attention and even has her own web site Obamagirl.com—therefore, drawing attention to Barrak Obama himself.

The article brought up an interesting idea when it spoke about Hilary Cliton’s role within social networks. Since Clinton did not take full advantage of online social networks, she relied on conventional campaign tactics, portraying the fact that she did not need online support and she could fund-raise money and support by herself. This is interesting because Cliton’s strategies play off of older media tactics, the idea of a one-way communication channel: Clinton spoke to her supporters and received a response through donations. On the other hand, Obama spoke to his supporters through different channels and the channels communicated to other people, creating a community. The community then helped raise support and donations for his campaign—no longer making it speaker and audience related, but more of a team effort. I believe that because Obama embraced online social networking, this was one of the main reasons he won the campaign. Communication outlets have shifted and during the 2008 election it was crucial that the candidates recognized this change and used it to their advantage.

After winning the campaign, www.my.barackobama.com focuses on current political topics with the help of blogs and videos. The supporters are able to express concern or praise for policies and this allows a more personal network for Obama and his supporters.

Link: Social Networking and the 2008 Election

Questions:

1.) The article states that McCain attempted to use network socializing through his daughter’s “bloggette” to attract younger supporters. Why was this not as successful as Obama’s online tools?

2.) In your opinion, what created the large number of interactive volunteers and supporters during the 2008 election and how did this election differ from past elections?

3.) The media has consistently focused on politician’s private issues rather than political. Blogs and online articles have enabled the public to gain a larger role within journalism; therefore, do you think the public has more knowledge of political issues today than what is framed by the media?

4.) How has MyBO had a negative effect on Obama? What are some examples?

Paper-writing: guiding questions

WHAT?: Is your main claim about your specific networked journalism product?

HOW?: Does your research support this claim or provide evidence for it?

WHY?: Is it important to make this claim? Why is your claim relevant?

Revised last few weeks

Here is a revised schedule for the rest of the quarter. I added a day of presentations so we won't be rushed. Also see the below post. We'll talk about fair use in class before then. I hope you all can make it. I PROMISE it will be more entertaining than the broadband panel I made you come to!

Week 8
Tuesday Feb 23 New New Media Landscape
Beckett Intro and Chapter 1
Review of Beckett
Leader Joshua
Respondent Alex

New New Media landscape cont.
Beckett Chapter 2
Leader Elizabeth
Respondent Bianca

Thursday Feb 25 Networked Journalism and Politics: How Obama Won
Beckett Chapter 3
David Talbot, How Obama Really Did It! (I'll email it to the class.)
Leader Alyssa
Respondent Jenna

Networked Journalism and the Political:The French Riots and Networked Global Media
Beckett Chapter 4
Leader Riley
Respondent Elizabeth

Week 9
Mar 2 The Future of News
Beckett Chapter 5
Leader Jenna
Respondent Alyssa
Shirky, Clay Thinking the Unthinkable
Leader Kacey
Respondent Nate


Mar 4 Presentations

Week 10
Mar 9 Presentations

Wireside Chat with Lessig 2/25 (Derigan, Chris, and Laleh too): Come if you can!!

Denver Open Media and DU's Digital Media Studies program are hosting a Wireside Chat with Lawrence Lessig, and a live panel discussion on fair use, February 25 starting at 4.

What: Live Webcast or "Wireside Chat" from Harvard's Berkman Center with Lawrence Lessig - http://openvideoalliance.org/event/lessig/ and live local broadcast panel on digital media and fair use with Chris Coleman, Laleh Mehran, Derigan Sliver and Jonny 5 of the Flobots.

When: February 25. Lessig's talk starts at 4pm. Then panel starts at 5:30.

Where: Denver Open Media, 700 Kalamath

All are invited. See details below. Hope to see you there.


The Talk

The lecture by Lawrence Lessig will last 45 minutes, and will be
followed by a 30 minute interactive Q & A session. The event will be
moderated by Elizabeth Stark of the Open Video Alliance. Questions can
be submitted using the hashtag #wireside.

This is a talk about copyright in a digital age, and the role (and
importance) of a doctrine like “fair use.” Fair use allows limited use
of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights
holders, and is essential for commentary, criticism, news reporting,
remix, research, teaching and scholarship with video.

The Panel

Chris Coleman is a digital artist and educator at DU who uses numerous
technological tools to share ideas. He has been teaching Processing
for three years to Undergraduate and Graduate students and presented
his research on the topic of "Interfacing GOOD Information" at the
FlashBelt conference in Minneapolis. The research dealt with inviting
people to experience information about the good being done in the
world (like work on sustainable energy solutions) both visually and
spatially. His work has been showcased in museums, galleries and
festivals in nearly 20 countries, and one of his software tools
(maxuino) has been downloaded 4000 times by people in 58 countries.

Laleh Mehran’s creative research and pedagogy explore digital video as
a tool to inspire critical discourse. Mehran has been teaching digital
video production for over a decade and has recently introduced High
Definition video into the classroom. Her video work has been exhibited
nationally and internationally at venues such as the European Media
Arts Festival in Osnabruck, Germany; Ponte Futura in Cortona Itlay;
the Orlo Video Festival in Portland, Oregon; the Carnegie Museum of
Art, and The Andy Warhol Museum. Mehran is an Associate Professor and
Graduate Director of the Electronic Media Arts Design program at the
University of Denver.

Jonny 5 is a writer, educator, and former high-school counselor,
better known as the lead-MC and founding member of the Flobots.
Currently signed to a multi-record deal with Universal Republic, the
Flobots' third album, Survival Story, will be released in March, 2010.
While the songs and videos released by Universal have tight copyright
restrictions, Jamie has also participated in a number of alternative
projects, including his current "Rhyme of the Day" effort to share a
new rap/verse every single day of 2010 on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/flobot5

Derigan Silver is an assistant professor in the Department of Media,
Film and Journalism Studies at the University of Denver. He teaches
courses on First Amendment law, media law, and Internet law and
regulation. He is the author of several book chapters and journal
articles, and his new book, National Security in the Courts: The
Requirements of Transparency vs. the Need for Secrecy, will be coming
out later this year.

1/3 of Americans Do Not Use the Internet

Here is another interesting article I found.  Its really short with mostly statistics, but I thought it was pertinent to our class discussions.  Click Here

Buzz about the Buzz

Here is that article I was talking about in class today about Google Buzz.  Click Here

Save Journalism, Save the World

Charlie Beckett's thought provoking statements in the introduction and first chapter of his book, Super Media, Saving Journalism So It Can Save the World, bring up many questions that I haven't even thought of.  His introduction is jam packed with brilliant ideas that pave the way for a great book. 

I like how he says that he doesn't pretend to be objective, but instead he aims to be fair, accurate, and thorough.  The changes that Beckett says are taking place in journalism, offer an immense opportunity for growth and what he believes is a whole new type of journalism.  Networked Journalism is a new way of practicing journalism where there isn't just the journalist working for the news outlet.  Now there are citizen journalists, interactivity, blogging, microblogging, and social networking that are all an indispensable part of the production and distribution of news.

I love the link Beckett has taken from Professor Roger Silverstone who compares journalism to the environment.  Journalism is facing its own kind of global warming.  Beckett estimates that we have "five years - perhaps ten - to save journalism so that journalism can save the world."  What would a world without journalism look like?


How will it be easier to deal with issues going on in the world with this "cosmopolitan, interactive 'audience'"?


Do you think the lack of diversity in journalism is because of the media corporations telling people what they can and cannot write about? Or do you think it is because of something else?  With blogging will we or have we begun to see diversity? And if so has the diversity been publicized?

On page 21 Beckett talks about the loss of the audience in mainstream news media.  The way I see it, because broadband is not being reached to everyone, we will still not reach all audiences online and some that may have gotten their news on television will not be able to go online.  How can we make up for that? Or how can that gap be fixed?


Here is an article that talks about how "computer nerds" could save journalism.  It was published in Time magazine online a few months ago. 

Midterm

Networked Journalism
Midterm Exam
February 4, 2010

Please answer the following questions as clearly, concisely and thoughtfully as you can. Use examples whenever possible. And proof read your work. Email me your answers by 5pm February 15, 2010. If I don't respond by 11pm email it again. Please paste your answers into the body of the email and make the subject "midterm." Thanks.

PART 1: Provide short answers (4-8 sentences) for the following questions.

1. What is the difference between bias and framing according to Schudson?

2. Who are the people formerly known as the audience and why are they called that?

3. What are some of the constraints the marketplace imposes on journalism?

4. What is Twitter and how do journalists use it?

5. What is are APIs and how are they changing journalism?


PART 2: Please write a 2-3 page double-spaced essay for each of the following 2 questions and draw on and cite material we have read and/or watched for class.

1. Write an essay on the framing of this news story. Begin by discussing what is a news frame and, according to the readings, what accounts for different frames. Then analyze the story in terms of its frame. Pay attention to visuals, sources, information included and excluded, themes, language, outlet that it appeared in, larger environment within which the media exists, and target readership.

2. Write an essay describing the changing taking place in journalism with the emergence multi- or rich- media formats and new media tools such as APIs, blogs, twitter and other social networking platforms. What are the major differences in journalism today compared to journalism 20 years ago in terms of how stories are reported and told and the role of the public in the news media environment. Please use specific news stories to illustrate in your answer.

Response for February 4th

In the article Blogger vs. Journalism Jay Rosen brings up significant points in the field of journalism over the roles that both bloggers and professional journalists play in the press. I use the term professional journalists because I (like Rosen) believe that bloggers are also a type of journalist except they typically don’t get paid to do their job.

In the article Rosen argues that the debate over bloggers and journalists has shift from and “us vs. them” game to and “us vs. how do we include them” game. Rosen lays out some pretty strong arguments for how big media and bloggers can incorporate into each other and still find a satisfy and their individual niches of serving the public just in different ways. In an article written by Mark Glaser he argues that the lines between blogger and journalist are being blurred even more. He states that blog companies are hiring seasoned reporters in order to gain more credibility and trust and that Rosen talked about in his article. Also seasoned journalists of major newspapers have started blogging as a way of getting their stories and “voice” out there.

Glaser goes on to argue that the line between journalist and blogger has been blurring since 2002. Similar to the state Rosen made in his article that blogs and traditional journalism have been intersecting every since 2001 and the terrorist attacks. The claim that I would like to make is that journalism and bloggers are still in debate. While this blurring of the lines has occurred I still don’t believe that major news organizations have truly embraced the blog for what it is. I believe they see it as another market to be tapped not a parallel market that will in some ways make their jobs easier and in other ways challenge them to keep up.

What do you think?

Is the battle between Journalists and Blogger over? Or are the battle lines just shifting?

Is main stream media truly starting to embrace the world of blogging or is it viewing it as another market to be tapped?

The Blogosphere: Equality for All?

Power Law can more simply be explained through the common phrase the 80/20 Rule. The 80/20 Rule was named after the Italian economist Vilfredo Pareto who noticed that 80% of income in Italy was received by 20% of the Italian population. The assumption is that most of the results in any situation are determined by a small number of causes.

Clay Shirky’s article, Power Laws, Weblogs, and Inequality, applies the power law to the world of blogging. He writes about the rise of an “A-List,” a small group of bloggers who constitute a majority of the traffic in the blogosphere. Shirky discovers that the online world, more specifically the blogosphere, is not filled with freedom and equality after all.

Shirky explains, “Diversity plus freedom of choice creates inequality, and the greater the diversity, the more extreme the inequality.”

He goes on to clarify explaining that in particular systems where most people are free to choose between a multitude of options, there is a small group, in this case the “A-list,” that will receive an inordinate amount of traffic.

Power law distributions are more likely to arise in social systems where large amounts of people express their preferences among several options. Shirky explains that, “as the number of options rise, the curve becomes more extreme.” So basically as the blogosphere gets bigger the percentage of “A-listers” as a proportion to total bloggers, gets smaller.

In ranking the likeness of a particular blog, one would assume that they were making the decision on their own. Unbeknownst to them, their freedom of choice is not always free or rather, they do not realize that they are not making a decision on their own. A small number of blogs that have been chosen (as in “liked”) in the past are more likely to be chosen in the future. From this system Shirky describes the emergence of a “preference premium.” So future users will not be selecting blogs at random but by preference premium, which has been built up by all of the past users.

There still is no answer as to why one blog may be preferred over another. Shirky comments that it could be a “preference for quality…a preference for marketing” or a preference based on what one’s friends like. It is just important to not that for whatever reason “diverse and free systems” can create power law distributions.

Shirky poses the question “Is the inequality fair?” He is referring to the inequality in the blogosphere. He explains that there are four things that indicate that the current inequality is primarily fair:

1) The freedom in the blogosphere.
2) Blogging is a daily activity; if a blogger stopped writing, his or her blog would just disappear.
3) The “stars exist because of the preference of hundreds of others pointing to them.”
4) There is no real A-list because there is no discontinuity.

By relying on power law distribution, Shriky doubts that there are bloggers that are as talented and deserving as the current A-list who are simply not getting any traffic. Even though the blogosphere is expanding to see more readers and writers, Shriky believes that they will just add to the traffic of the current A-listers. As the online world gets bigger, it will get harder and harder for someone to prove themselves in the blogosphere. This gap will just keep growing and growing.

Questions

The idea of the power law seems to be fixed in mathematics, but do you really believe that all of the great blogs have already been discovered?

In your opinion, is the inequality of the blogosphere fair? What do you think about the idea of a free but unequal market?

In hopes that broadband can be extended to the masses, what do you think will happen to the weblog and this online marketplace of ideas?

Shirky writes this whole article to explain what the A-list is. He goes on to show how it exists with the idea of power law, but then when he lists his four reasons as to why the current inequality is fair, he says that there really is no A-list because there is no discontinuity. What is this contradiction all about? What does he mean by this?


To check out more of Clay Shirky’s writing, click here.

Response for February 4

In response to Alex's post on the 80/20 rule, I have to ask myself a few questions. First of all, Shirky states he believes that some blogs are not recognized the way they should be. However, one of the main reasons this may be true is that the key words do not match on the search engine? That could be a fatal flaw in the blogger. However, if the blogger doesn't find away to get attention form a search engine then it may not be the sharpest blog to begin with. Additionally, writing clarity and organization add to the readership. If I stumble across a poorly written blog, chances are I am not going to add it to my bookmarks.

Consistency and creativity are key features to keep an active blog readership. Many factors go into the maintenance of an effective blog. Take for example, the "beppegrillo" blog that has received so much attention in Italy and globally. There are daily posts, videos, and pictures to keep the audience coming back for more.

Shirky talks of a "preference premium," where a select few blogs gain more attention, overshadowing many other blogs. Do you think this premium is well deserved? Or are other equally as good blogs being overshadowed due to it?

One last question, if high quality blogs are overshadowed by these "preference premium" blogs, then how can the public find these blogs and recognize them as high quality as well?

On a related note, while researching for my paper prospectus I stumbled across a great website that breaks down some of the terminology and technical issues relating to how to "survive and thrive" as a journalist in today's world. Definitely worth checking out! It is called "Journalism 2.0".