National Review editor Rich Lowry came to campus yesterday, and his talk was a great supplement to Arianna Huffington's speech two weeks ago. Though Lowry and Huffington are on opposite sides of the political spectrum, both had similar sentiments about our current media climate.
Lowry noted that "legacy media, an artifact of institutions, corporations, and technological limitations," is quickly coming to an end. He pointed out many of the flaws of current corporate media, such as the selectivity of soundbytes and the bias of video. While many would argue that video is proof of what is the truth, I particularly liked Lowry's comment disputing this claim: "Video can lie, depending on how it's edited and how much you see." Currently shooting, editing, and producing a 30-minute documentary for my TV Workshop class, I know how true that statement is. I constantly have to consider the implications of soundbytes taken out of the context of full interviews.
Lowry talked about how today's new media is actually returning to the ideals of the earliest journalism. Historically, newspapers were partisan. Somewhere down the road, the myth of objectivity was born. New media prides itself on being unabashedly partisan, and Lowry sees this as one of its assets: "They don't even try to be objective. And from where I sit, that's a profoundly good thing."
Why? Lowry referenced John Stewart Mills's marketplace of ideas and the theory that only through the collision of adverse opinions will truth be obtained. When asked during the question and answer session whether partisan new media will result in "splintering" and people reading only what they already agree with, Lowry admitted this is a possible problem, but then added that alternate views are easily accessible for those who are curious. Our professor, Jeff Cohen, chimed in to say that internet journalism often brings both sides of an issue to the forefront because the subject of criticism is frequently linked to. Links, rather than videos, are becoming the new evidence of truth.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Word of the Year: Unfriend
A few weeks ago, I read about how being unfriended on social networking sites can bruise your digital ego. I laughed, but had to admit the complexities of social networking friendships. I personally refuse to friend anyone on Facebook that I haven't actually met in person, but I've still had my share of internal debates over confirming "friendships" with people I have met. Is it okay to accept friend requests from campers I counseled at summer day camps that want to keep in touch? Professors I currently have for classes? High school classmates I know for a fact loathed me, but are curious enough to want to keep tabs on me?
That last example was the first dilemma I faced, way back freshman year when I was a Facebook newbie. My boyfriend at the time convinced me to accept the "friendship," telling me, "You can't not friend someone on Facebook. It's rude." I conceded and gave in.
While I've faced various friending dilemmas since then, it's gotten easier for two reasons. First, Facebook's privacy settings are a lifesaver, allowing me to limit what certain friends can see. Secondly, I've taken down all questionable photos, making sure that everything on my profile would be acceptable for a potential employer to see. When my aunt recently joined Facebook and friended me, I had a mini heart attack -- until I remembered I don't have anything to hide. If it's okay for a potential employer to see, it's okay for my aunt. (Admittedly, I dread the day my mom joins Facebook. I rather like that she can't keep such close tabs on me at the moment.)
Since Facebook friendships are much more tenuous than real friendships, they sometimes come to a rather abrupt end. A roommate of mine recently unfriended someone simply because she kept stealing points from her on Food Friendzy, a Facebook application that awards you coupons to local food places. While Hannah felt perfectly justified in defending her Food Friendzy points, she did feel a twinge of guilt over the stigma of unfriending someone.
Apparently Hannah and I are not alone in our friending dilemmas. The New Oxford American Dictionary has selected "unfriend" as its word of the year.
That last example was the first dilemma I faced, way back freshman year when I was a Facebook newbie. My boyfriend at the time convinced me to accept the "friendship," telling me, "You can't not friend someone on Facebook. It's rude." I conceded and gave in.
While I've faced various friending dilemmas since then, it's gotten easier for two reasons. First, Facebook's privacy settings are a lifesaver, allowing me to limit what certain friends can see. Secondly, I've taken down all questionable photos, making sure that everything on my profile would be acceptable for a potential employer to see. When my aunt recently joined Facebook and friended me, I had a mini heart attack -- until I remembered I don't have anything to hide. If it's okay for a potential employer to see, it's okay for my aunt. (Admittedly, I dread the day my mom joins Facebook. I rather like that she can't keep such close tabs on me at the moment.)
Since Facebook friendships are much more tenuous than real friendships, they sometimes come to a rather abrupt end. A roommate of mine recently unfriended someone simply because she kept stealing points from her on Food Friendzy, a Facebook application that awards you coupons to local food places. While Hannah felt perfectly justified in defending her Food Friendzy points, she did feel a twinge of guilt over the stigma of unfriending someone.
Apparently Hannah and I are not alone in our friending dilemmas. The New Oxford American Dictionary has selected "unfriend" as its word of the year.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Can You Tweet Libel?
Can you tweet libel? Is Google Earth an invasion of privacy? Who owns the copyright to user-generated content on Facebook?
As social media continues to burgeon, these are some of the issues courts are currently debating. Courtney Love is being sued for libel after slamming a designer on Twitter. So is Amanda Bonnen, who tweeted about a realtor's moldy apartment. A couple took Google to court over Google Earth, claiming the Street View feature was an invasion of their privacy. And Facebook was put in the hot seat after amending its terms of use and sharing user info on partner sites.
Technology is evolving so fast, the laws can't keep up. Everything the Internet is praised for -- providing easy access to information, connecting people who are geographically far away, breaking down barriers between public and private domains -- complicates lawmaking. If two Facebook users sue each other, one in England and the other in Australia, which country's laws have jurisdiction? Can colleges deny degrees based on students' Facebook content? How far does Web anonymity extend?
Clearly, the courts have their work cut out for them as they wrestle to revise existing media laws. And by the time they decide what to do about Facebook and Twitter, other new media are sure to leave them newly stumped.
As social media continues to burgeon, these are some of the issues courts are currently debating. Courtney Love is being sued for libel after slamming a designer on Twitter. So is Amanda Bonnen, who tweeted about a realtor's moldy apartment. A couple took Google to court over Google Earth, claiming the Street View feature was an invasion of their privacy. And Facebook was put in the hot seat after amending its terms of use and sharing user info on partner sites.
Technology is evolving so fast, the laws can't keep up. Everything the Internet is praised for -- providing easy access to information, connecting people who are geographically far away, breaking down barriers between public and private domains -- complicates lawmaking. If two Facebook users sue each other, one in England and the other in Australia, which country's laws have jurisdiction? Can colleges deny degrees based on students' Facebook content? How far does Web anonymity extend?
Clearly, the courts have their work cut out for them as they wrestle to revise existing media laws. And by the time they decide what to do about Facebook and Twitter, other new media are sure to leave them newly stumped.
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Goodbye Objectivity, Hello Links
The idea of transparency as the new objectivity has come up repeatedly in more than one of my journalism classes this semester. In my Issues & the News class, we were comparing newspapers around the world, and our professor mentioned that the idea of an "objective" paper is not the status quo everywhere. In the United Kingdom, for instance, partisan papers are the norm, and people know exactly which papers to read if they want a liberal or conservative slant to their news.
In my Independent Media class, we just read David Weinberger's blog on this subject. Weinberger argues that objectivity, a value highly prized in print media, will become obsolete as more and more of our news shifts to an online format. While newspaper readers may be content to take a journalist's claim at face value, online media consumers are more skeptical -- and active. They want links so they can click away and find out more about the topic in question. Online news is a starting rather than stopping point, inviting further investigation and discussion. In Weinberger's words:
In an era of citizen journalists where anyone can contribute news content, the idea of journalists as authority figures is rapidly disappearing. Instead, they are now filling the role of conversation facilitators, providing readers with resources to learn more on their own.
Weinberger concluded his blog post by saying:"In short: Objectivity is a trust mechanism you rely on when your medium can’t do links. Now our medium can."
During her visit to Ithaca College two weeks ago, Arianna Huffington further elucidated Weinberger's point by saying, "We are now living in a linked economy." She then went on to talk about what this means, that content put behind closed walls no longer works -- online readers want their news for free and have no tolerance for subscription fees.
If the nightmares of technology-phobic teachers ever become a reality and textbooks adopt a solely digital format, links would take the place of bold vocabulary words that hint to students the concept is important and they should look up the word in the glossary at their earliest convenience. In a digital world, links would signal to students that more information is available with the click of a mouse.
In many ways, this is already happening. On an average day, I conduct upwards of 10 Google searches, mainly to find out more information about current events I've just read about on CNN.com. Even more shocking? One classmate recently told our Issues professor that Wikipedia has been the sole source of her history lessons these past four years of college.
In my Independent Media class, we just read David Weinberger's blog on this subject. Weinberger argues that objectivity, a value highly prized in print media, will become obsolete as more and more of our news shifts to an online format. While newspaper readers may be content to take a journalist's claim at face value, online media consumers are more skeptical -- and active. They want links so they can click away and find out more about the topic in question. Online news is a starting rather than stopping point, inviting further investigation and discussion. In Weinberger's words:
"Transparency prospers in a linked medium, for you can literally see the connections between the final draft’s claims and the ideas that informed it. Paper, on the other hand, sucks at links. You can look up the footnote, but that’s an expensive, time-consuming activity more likely to result in failure than success. So, during the Age of Paper, we got used to the idea that authority comes in the form of a stop sign: You’ve reached a source whose reliability requires no further inquiry."
In an era of citizen journalists where anyone can contribute news content, the idea of journalists as authority figures is rapidly disappearing. Instead, they are now filling the role of conversation facilitators, providing readers with resources to learn more on their own.
Weinberger concluded his blog post by saying:"In short: Objectivity is a trust mechanism you rely on when your medium can’t do links. Now our medium can."
During her visit to Ithaca College two weeks ago, Arianna Huffington further elucidated Weinberger's point by saying, "We are now living in a linked economy." She then went on to talk about what this means, that content put behind closed walls no longer works -- online readers want their news for free and have no tolerance for subscription fees.
If the nightmares of technology-phobic teachers ever become a reality and textbooks adopt a solely digital format, links would take the place of bold vocabulary words that hint to students the concept is important and they should look up the word in the glossary at their earliest convenience. In a digital world, links would signal to students that more information is available with the click of a mouse.
In many ways, this is already happening. On an average day, I conduct upwards of 10 Google searches, mainly to find out more information about current events I've just read about on CNN.com. Even more shocking? One classmate recently told our Issues professor that Wikipedia has been the sole source of her history lessons these past four years of college.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
The Best - and Worst - Places to Be a Journalist
My sister sent me this article with the warning: "Choose wisely, my traveling sister." Based on the 2009 Press Freedom Index, this Time article summarizes the index's findings of which countries have the most - and least - press freedom. Following Obama's inauguration, the U.S. jumped up the list from 36th to 20th. Topping the list are Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden and Ireland. The bottom three slots are occupied by Turkmenistan, North Korea and Eritrea where "the media are so suppressed they are non-existent." Other notable changes in this year's report include Europe losing three spots in the top 20, Israel facing increased censorship and five African countries making it into the top 50. The official Press Freedom Index 2009 can be found here.
And just for fun, while we are on the topic of countries censoring the press, I found this cartoon a few days ago that shows the emerging power of new media.
And just for fun, while we are on the topic of countries censoring the press, I found this cartoon a few days ago that shows the emerging power of new media.
Friday, November 6, 2009
Smart Journalism
When professor Vadim Isakov guest spoke in our class yesterday about emerging new technologies trends, I couldn't but think of the Disney Channel movie Smart House. When the movie was released ten years ago, the idea of a house run by an internal computer system seemed little more than cool science fiction. Today it seems a very possible reality.
Professor Isakov talked about nine new technology trends: real-time Web, lightblogging, personalization, interactive TV, identity recognition, augmented reality, mobile life, geolocation, and an internet of things. Many of these trends entail tailoring media to your specific needs, be it finding the nearest pizza place by a voice command on your phone or ordering Pam's outfit with a click of the remote as you're watching The Office. Other trends facilitate life on the go: QR codes on cell phones that act as boarding passes and the ability to verbally dictate a blog post via your cell phone. Still others, like Roomba vacuums that run automatically, are robots that perform pesky human chores.
I particularly liked Professor Isakov's response to the question of whether all this new technology eliminates the need for journalists. "If you define a journalist as someone who gathers information, you don't need journalists anymore," he said. However, he immediately added that we continue to need analysis, explanation and fact-checking.
Journalists' jobs are certainly changing, but they remain crucial. They are evolving from information gatherers to information synthesizers and most importantly, analysts. As my high school teachers used to say, "A monkey can copy text from the book. I want you to tell me what it means."
Furthermore, the best journalistic writing has personality to it. It has sass. Humor. Attitude. It's littered with pop culture references. A computer or robot can be programmed to compile facts, but the end result will lack creativity and anecdotal evidence. It will be a fact sheet rather than a story.
Robots will not oust journalists from their jobs, but they may improve certain parts of the journalistic process. Personally, I'd love a gadget that would automatically transcribe all my interviews from my recorder onto my laptop. Anyone want to invent that?
Professor Isakov talked about nine new technology trends: real-time Web, lightblogging, personalization, interactive TV, identity recognition, augmented reality, mobile life, geolocation, and an internet of things. Many of these trends entail tailoring media to your specific needs, be it finding the nearest pizza place by a voice command on your phone or ordering Pam's outfit with a click of the remote as you're watching The Office. Other trends facilitate life on the go: QR codes on cell phones that act as boarding passes and the ability to verbally dictate a blog post via your cell phone. Still others, like Roomba vacuums that run automatically, are robots that perform pesky human chores.
I particularly liked Professor Isakov's response to the question of whether all this new technology eliminates the need for journalists. "If you define a journalist as someone who gathers information, you don't need journalists anymore," he said. However, he immediately added that we continue to need analysis, explanation and fact-checking.
Journalists' jobs are certainly changing, but they remain crucial. They are evolving from information gatherers to information synthesizers and most importantly, analysts. As my high school teachers used to say, "A monkey can copy text from the book. I want you to tell me what it means."
Furthermore, the best journalistic writing has personality to it. It has sass. Humor. Attitude. It's littered with pop culture references. A computer or robot can be programmed to compile facts, but the end result will lack creativity and anecdotal evidence. It will be a fact sheet rather than a story.
Robots will not oust journalists from their jobs, but they may improve certain parts of the journalistic process. Personally, I'd love a gadget that would automatically transcribe all my interviews from my recorder onto my laptop. Anyone want to invent that?
Thursday, November 5, 2009
The Antiquity of TVs
"I hate movie theaters," I often told my high school boyfriends. "The seats are uncomfortable and the stupid armrests make it impossible to cuddle. Can't we just stay home and rent a movie?"
In college, I was quickly introduced to a whole new style of movie watching. Very few of my friends owned TVs, but all of us owned laptops. Hence, our laptops became our makeshift TVs.
Three years later, TV watching on my laptop has become so automatic that I see my laptop as half computer, half TV. It serves both functions, and best of all is portable so I can take it wherever I go.
I couldn't help but laugh as I read David Sarno's article "Wanna share ear buds?" Clearly not a member of the Net Gen, Sarno acknowledges that releasing a movie solely online has economic advantages, but struggles with the idea that people would actually want - prefer, if you dare - to watch a movie on 3-inch by 2-inch iPod screen instead of a gigantic movie theater screen.
"Nothing says romance like sharing ear buds," Sarno facetiously writes. Even Eddy Cue, vice president of iTunes, seemed clueless of the full potential of online-only movie releases. He suggested people may watch movies on their iPods during long-distance traveling or at the gym - in other words, when they simply lack access to traditional, full-size TVs.
But why do we even need TVs anymore? To Baby Boomers that cling desperately to print newspapers and landline telephones, getting rid of TVs probably sounds catastrophic. (This summer, after fighting with cords for half and hour and still failing to successfully hook up our massive TV, I suggested to my mom we watch the rented movie on my laptop. She reeled back in shock and replied, "But the screen's so small!") But to the average Net Gener, TVs are obsolete. They're clunky and singularly functional. Laptops are mobile and multifunctional. There's no contest. And that's not to mention the unnecessary cost of cable versus free online viewing.
Maybe I've been living the life of a skint college student for too long. My viewing habits have, admittedly, largely been dictated by convenience, a shoestring budget, and the limited dimensions of college living space. But you know what? When I graduate in May and get my own grown-up apartment, I see no need to buy a TV. I'll use that money to buy a new iPod.
In college, I was quickly introduced to a whole new style of movie watching. Very few of my friends owned TVs, but all of us owned laptops. Hence, our laptops became our makeshift TVs.
Three years later, TV watching on my laptop has become so automatic that I see my laptop as half computer, half TV. It serves both functions, and best of all is portable so I can take it wherever I go.
I couldn't help but laugh as I read David Sarno's article "Wanna share ear buds?" Clearly not a member of the Net Gen, Sarno acknowledges that releasing a movie solely online has economic advantages, but struggles with the idea that people would actually want - prefer, if you dare - to watch a movie on 3-inch by 2-inch iPod screen instead of a gigantic movie theater screen.
"Nothing says romance like sharing ear buds," Sarno facetiously writes. Even Eddy Cue, vice president of iTunes, seemed clueless of the full potential of online-only movie releases. He suggested people may watch movies on their iPods during long-distance traveling or at the gym - in other words, when they simply lack access to traditional, full-size TVs.
But why do we even need TVs anymore? To Baby Boomers that cling desperately to print newspapers and landline telephones, getting rid of TVs probably sounds catastrophic. (This summer, after fighting with cords for half and hour and still failing to successfully hook up our massive TV, I suggested to my mom we watch the rented movie on my laptop. She reeled back in shock and replied, "But the screen's so small!") But to the average Net Gener, TVs are obsolete. They're clunky and singularly functional. Laptops are mobile and multifunctional. There's no contest. And that's not to mention the unnecessary cost of cable versus free online viewing.
Maybe I've been living the life of a skint college student for too long. My viewing habits have, admittedly, largely been dictated by convenience, a shoestring budget, and the limited dimensions of college living space. But you know what? When I graduate in May and get my own grown-up apartment, I see no need to buy a TV. I'll use that money to buy a new iPod.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Hiring: Link Gatherers
While traditional media often eschew change, social media embraces it. The average social networker can barely keep up with new features before something else is added. (I STILL haven't figured out the difference between Facebook's new Live Feed vs. News Feed.)
Twitter is no different. This week, it introduced a "Lists" feature, which allows users to organize the people they follow into neat little categories. Blogger Pete Cashmore suggests this feature is the "long-overdue cure to information overload" and may create a brand new job title: real-time Web curator.
Cashmore dubs niche-specific Twitter users "link gatherers," whose job it is to provide the latest information about their niche subject to the world via Twitter. As Cashmore sees it, this is a job, not a hobby - and link gatherers should be paid for their work:
Moreover, Cashmore believes journalists are well-qualified for this job opening:" Journalists, it would seem, are well-placed to capitalize on the trend, since directing an audience's attention via links is not materially different to editing a newspaper or magazine."
If this idea takes off, will j schools start offering how-to courses in link gathering?
Twitter is no different. This week, it introduced a "Lists" feature, which allows users to organize the people they follow into neat little categories. Blogger Pete Cashmore suggests this feature is the "long-overdue cure to information overload" and may create a brand new job title: real-time Web curator.
Cashmore dubs niche-specific Twitter users "link gatherers," whose job it is to provide the latest information about their niche subject to the world via Twitter. As Cashmore sees it, this is a job, not a hobby - and link gatherers should be paid for their work:
Most of these link gatherers have "real" jobs, you'll notice; I see no reason why that should remain the case. In the attention economy, wherein the scarce resource is time and the abundant one is content, those who effectively allocate our attention create value.
Where value is created, it follows that money can be made. The inevitable outcome: Web curators are not just real-time but full-time.
Moreover, Cashmore believes journalists are well-qualified for this job opening:" Journalists, it would seem, are well-placed to capitalize on the trend, since directing an audience's attention via links is not materially different to editing a newspaper or magazine."
If this idea takes off, will j schools start offering how-to courses in link gathering?
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
The Future of Journalism
I had a conversation with a professor after class today. It went something like this:
"A bunch of my freshman advisees want to change majors."
"To what?"
"Television-Radio, Cinema & Photography, anything other than journalism."
"Why?"
"They feel there's no future in journalism, that there aren't any jobs out there."
At this point, I brought up independent media and how that sector of journalism is expanding by the minute, providing countless job opportunities. We discussed that journalism classes may need to be revamped to focus more on new rather than old models of journalism, but that the field itself is far from dying.
In her speech today on campus, Arianna Huffington echoed similar sentiments. "I believe in a hybrid future," she said. Huffington went on to say that we are in a "golden age" of journalism where we can combine the best tenets of traditional journalism such as accuracy and fact-checking with the best tenets of new, online journalism: transparency, immediacy, and many voices.
Online media, Huffington said, often steps in to fill the void left by mainstream media who choose to spend their time covering trivial stories like Balloon Boy and "the latest missing blonde."
"The mainstream media missed the two biggest stories of our time," she said. "The lead-up to the war in Iraq and the economic meltdown."
She spoke about the importance of citizen journalists, especially during the elections in Iran and the Chinese uprisings this past summer. Iranian citizens recorded election happenings via blogs, tweets, and camera phones, showing the world what was really happening. When riots broke out in China shortly after, the Chinese government blocked the internet to prevent citizen journalism from occurring. Instead, Chinese officials invited professional journalists to cover the event.
"They were acknowledging it's much easier to spin real-life journalists than thousands of tweets," she said, and then provided historical examples of how professional journalists have been spun in the past.
A huge asset of online, independent media is its open sourcing, where anyone can contribute. Huffington concluded her speech by challenging the audience to embrace this opportunity and improve the quality of journalism today, with or without a journalism degree:"Instead of waiting for knights on white horses to save us, we can look in the mirror and see the leadership we have in ourselves to have an impact."
Josh Marshall, Glen Greenwald, and Arianna Huffington have already made their impact. What will yours be?
"A bunch of my freshman advisees want to change majors."
"To what?"
"Television-Radio, Cinema & Photography, anything other than journalism."
"Why?"
"They feel there's no future in journalism, that there aren't any jobs out there."
At this point, I brought up independent media and how that sector of journalism is expanding by the minute, providing countless job opportunities. We discussed that journalism classes may need to be revamped to focus more on new rather than old models of journalism, but that the field itself is far from dying.
In her speech today on campus, Arianna Huffington echoed similar sentiments. "I believe in a hybrid future," she said. Huffington went on to say that we are in a "golden age" of journalism where we can combine the best tenets of traditional journalism such as accuracy and fact-checking with the best tenets of new, online journalism: transparency, immediacy, and many voices.
Online media, Huffington said, often steps in to fill the void left by mainstream media who choose to spend their time covering trivial stories like Balloon Boy and "the latest missing blonde."
"The mainstream media missed the two biggest stories of our time," she said. "The lead-up to the war in Iraq and the economic meltdown."
She spoke about the importance of citizen journalists, especially during the elections in Iran and the Chinese uprisings this past summer. Iranian citizens recorded election happenings via blogs, tweets, and camera phones, showing the world what was really happening. When riots broke out in China shortly after, the Chinese government blocked the internet to prevent citizen journalism from occurring. Instead, Chinese officials invited professional journalists to cover the event.
"They were acknowledging it's much easier to spin real-life journalists than thousands of tweets," she said, and then provided historical examples of how professional journalists have been spun in the past.
A huge asset of online, independent media is its open sourcing, where anyone can contribute. Huffington concluded her speech by challenging the audience to embrace this opportunity and improve the quality of journalism today, with or without a journalism degree:"Instead of waiting for knights on white horses to save us, we can look in the mirror and see the leadership we have in ourselves to have an impact."
Josh Marshall, Glen Greenwald, and Arianna Huffington have already made their impact. What will yours be?
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Happy Birthday, Internet!
Three years ago I sat in the Park School auditorium, giggling with my classmates as our Mass Media professor showed us Googlezon, the futuristic sci-fi video about how Google was going to take over the world by the year 2014.
The very next semester, iMPrint, an online college magazine founded and based at Ithaca College, did an in-depth report about Net Neutrality. (Articles that were part of this in-depth series can be found here, here, and here.)
At the time, I didn't have a clue what Net Neutrality was or why it was a big deal. I declined a personal invitation from iMPrint's then editor-in-chief to contribute to the in-depth report about Net Neutrality, seeing it as some boring political issue that would resolve itself and wasn't worth learning about.
Boy was I wrong.
Less than a year later, in February 2008, two news stories broke about Google erasing search results for people who dared to be bold. When journalist Matthew Lee exposed United Nations corruption on his one-man news website, Inner City Press, he received an e-mail from Google saying that his website would no longer be included in Google News. In China, university professor Guo Quan lost his online identity when he founded a democratic opposition party.
Net Neutrality continues to be an issue today. Congress and the FCC are currently battling it out over how best to preserve a neutral web. The Internet, meanwhile, celebrated its 40th birthday this past Thursday (October 29).
Happy Birthday, Internet. May you continue to transform our lives in new ways and enjoy unrestricted freedom in your next 40 years.
P.S. We discussed in class how the term Net Neutrality is rather misleading as to what it refers to. Apparently Arianna Huffington agrees with us.
The very next semester, iMPrint, an online college magazine founded and based at Ithaca College, did an in-depth report about Net Neutrality. (Articles that were part of this in-depth series can be found here, here, and here.)
At the time, I didn't have a clue what Net Neutrality was or why it was a big deal. I declined a personal invitation from iMPrint's then editor-in-chief to contribute to the in-depth report about Net Neutrality, seeing it as some boring political issue that would resolve itself and wasn't worth learning about.
Boy was I wrong.
Less than a year later, in February 2008, two news stories broke about Google erasing search results for people who dared to be bold. When journalist Matthew Lee exposed United Nations corruption on his one-man news website, Inner City Press, he received an e-mail from Google saying that his website would no longer be included in Google News. In China, university professor Guo Quan lost his online identity when he founded a democratic opposition party.
Net Neutrality continues to be an issue today. Congress and the FCC are currently battling it out over how best to preserve a neutral web. The Internet, meanwhile, celebrated its 40th birthday this past Thursday (October 29).
Happy Birthday, Internet. May you continue to transform our lives in new ways and enjoy unrestricted freedom in your next 40 years.
P.S. We discussed in class how the term Net Neutrality is rather misleading as to what it refers to. Apparently Arianna Huffington agrees with us.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
How to Build a Career in Indy Media
Three years out of college, Kate Sheppard has an illustrious independent media career. She has written for Grist magazine and The Guardian, and currently writes for Mother Jones magazine. She has blogged for MSN. Before she guest spoke in class today, she was waiting for a call from the U.S. Secretary of Energy.
A 2006 graduate of Ithaca College, Kate came to our class today to share some wisdom with current IC students. She talked about the challenges and highlights of her career thus far, and offered practical steps for us to take in developing our own careers. Formatted into a Top 10 list, here were Kate's nuggets of wisdom:
1. Throw out your assumptions and be flexible.
"I've had about five jobs in the past three years," Kate said. "When I was your age, I expected to work for one publication for about five years before moving on to another one. All the assumptions I had were totally wrong." While most college grads don't jump at the chance to take on more internships and glorified internships, Kate said that taking these positions after graduation helped her further her reporting and researching skills and develop connections with editors.
2. Make connections and develop relationships with others in your field.
Kate used all of her internships and jobs as stepping stones, allowing her to develop connections with sources and editors that opened doors to future job opportunities.
3. Develop an area of expertise.
A journalism and politics double major in college, Kate found a niche in reporting environmental politics and climate change. "No one in D.C. was covering environmental politics for a general audience," she said. She has written so extensively on these issues that MSN sought her out to write a "green" blog.
4. Use new technologies to your advantage.
Modern independent media was born out of blogs and the freedom of the internet. It makes sense that aspiring independent journalists should be blogging and tweeting to get their name out there and develop the all-important "digital footprint" that we constantly talk about in class. (Related personal anecdote: a friend of mine wrote on my Facebook wall today that I am "allll over Google." I wrote back to her and explained the concept of a digital footprint.)
5. Go solo.
When a senator wanted to speak about how the Gross Domestic Product is an inaccurate reflection of a country's economy, he was the only senator to show up. Kate was the only reporter to show up, and hence the only one to get the story.
6. Accept the notion of the starving journalist.
Being a journalist is "a lot like being a college student," Kate said. She lives in a big group house, doesn't spend much money, and eats a lot of Ramen when times are tough. "This isn't a job to go into as a 20-something who wants to live comfortably," she admitted.
7. Freelance to survive.
To supplement her less-than-ideal internship stipends, Kate freelanced for WireTap, The Guardian, and MSN.
8. Develop pitching skills.
Fantastic stories won't get picked up by publications if your initial pitch is lackluster. Kate explained how to write a short, effective pitch - an essential skill that is often overlooked in traditional journalism classes.
9. No press pass? Public events are your new best friend.
Kate explained that one of the biggest challenges facing independent media today is their inability to obtain Congressional press passes. However, in a big city like Washington, D.C., many important events are open to the public, rendering press passes less essential than one might think.
10. Learn basic web skills.
Being familiar with blogging, basic HTML coding and knowing how to shoot, edit and insert video clips into online stories will make you much marketable in today's tech savvy world. Learn a bit more than the basics and "they'll love you," Kate said.
A 2006 graduate of Ithaca College, Kate came to our class today to share some wisdom with current IC students. She talked about the challenges and highlights of her career thus far, and offered practical steps for us to take in developing our own careers. Formatted into a Top 10 list, here were Kate's nuggets of wisdom:
1. Throw out your assumptions and be flexible.
"I've had about five jobs in the past three years," Kate said. "When I was your age, I expected to work for one publication for about five years before moving on to another one. All the assumptions I had were totally wrong." While most college grads don't jump at the chance to take on more internships and glorified internships, Kate said that taking these positions after graduation helped her further her reporting and researching skills and develop connections with editors.
2. Make connections and develop relationships with others in your field.
Kate used all of her internships and jobs as stepping stones, allowing her to develop connections with sources and editors that opened doors to future job opportunities.
3. Develop an area of expertise.
A journalism and politics double major in college, Kate found a niche in reporting environmental politics and climate change. "No one in D.C. was covering environmental politics for a general audience," she said. She has written so extensively on these issues that MSN sought her out to write a "green" blog.
4. Use new technologies to your advantage.
Modern independent media was born out of blogs and the freedom of the internet. It makes sense that aspiring independent journalists should be blogging and tweeting to get their name out there and develop the all-important "digital footprint" that we constantly talk about in class. (Related personal anecdote: a friend of mine wrote on my Facebook wall today that I am "allll over Google." I wrote back to her and explained the concept of a digital footprint.)
5. Go solo.
When a senator wanted to speak about how the Gross Domestic Product is an inaccurate reflection of a country's economy, he was the only senator to show up. Kate was the only reporter to show up, and hence the only one to get the story.
6. Accept the notion of the starving journalist.
Being a journalist is "a lot like being a college student," Kate said. She lives in a big group house, doesn't spend much money, and eats a lot of Ramen when times are tough. "This isn't a job to go into as a 20-something who wants to live comfortably," she admitted.
7. Freelance to survive.
To supplement her less-than-ideal internship stipends, Kate freelanced for WireTap, The Guardian, and MSN.
8. Develop pitching skills.
Fantastic stories won't get picked up by publications if your initial pitch is lackluster. Kate explained how to write a short, effective pitch - an essential skill that is often overlooked in traditional journalism classes.
9. No press pass? Public events are your new best friend.
Kate explained that one of the biggest challenges facing independent media today is their inability to obtain Congressional press passes. However, in a big city like Washington, D.C., many important events are open to the public, rendering press passes less essential than one might think.
10. Learn basic web skills.
Being familiar with blogging, basic HTML coding and knowing how to shoot, edit and insert video clips into online stories will make you much marketable in today's tech savvy world. Learn a bit more than the basics and "they'll love you," Kate said.
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Blogging in the Classroom...and Beyond!
Earlier this semester, we read a blog post by Glenn Greenwald about the lessons sports columnist Dwight Jaynes learned from bloggers' reporting techniques. Jaynes admitted to becoming "too close" to the people he covered. Dependent on access and quotes, he became unable to criticize them when necessary. Bloggers, in contrast, report from a distance. In Jaynes's words, "They aren't hindered by a need to get along or kiss up to the people they write about."
I recently stumbled across this blog post on Edutopia by teacher Will Richardson who, like Jaynes, has high praise for bloggers. Consider this quote:
"I can say without hesitation that all my traditional educational experiences combined, everything from grade school to grad school, have not taught me as much about learning and being a learner as blogging has. My ability to easily consume other people's ideas, share my own in return, and communicate with other educators around the world has led me to dozens of smart, passionate teachers from whom I learn every day."
Richardson goes on to say that in this Web 2.0 world, teachers are quick to block applications like blogs and wikis and social networking sites from classrooms, seeing them as a hindrance to learning. In reality, Richardson argues, they are what learning should be. There is a reason why lectures and textbooks and multiple choice tests fail to capture students' imagination, yet they sit absorbed for hours on interactive game sites and write for fun on personal websites. New media grabs these students' attention, and instead of fighting for it back, teachers need to learn to harness new technologies to their advantage in the classroom.
Blogs have found their place in newsrooms and are struggling to do the same in classrooms. Their enormous potential for collaboration and information sharing makes it only a matter of time before they become fixtures in virtually every professional environment. I can't wait.
I recently stumbled across this blog post on Edutopia by teacher Will Richardson who, like Jaynes, has high praise for bloggers. Consider this quote:
"I can say without hesitation that all my traditional educational experiences combined, everything from grade school to grad school, have not taught me as much about learning and being a learner as blogging has. My ability to easily consume other people's ideas, share my own in return, and communicate with other educators around the world has led me to dozens of smart, passionate teachers from whom I learn every day."
Richardson goes on to say that in this Web 2.0 world, teachers are quick to block applications like blogs and wikis and social networking sites from classrooms, seeing them as a hindrance to learning. In reality, Richardson argues, they are what learning should be. There is a reason why lectures and textbooks and multiple choice tests fail to capture students' imagination, yet they sit absorbed for hours on interactive game sites and write for fun on personal websites. New media grabs these students' attention, and instead of fighting for it back, teachers need to learn to harness new technologies to their advantage in the classroom.
Blogs have found their place in newsrooms and are struggling to do the same in classrooms. Their enormous potential for collaboration and information sharing makes it only a matter of time before they become fixtures in virtually every professional environment. I can't wait.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Onion Writer Speaks Truth
When Onion staff writer Seth Reiss came to campus last night, I expected a talk on "creativity in the journalism world as well as the ever changing realm of technology and media." That's what the e-mail announcements purported he would speak about.
Wrong.
I should have known better. It is, after all, The Onion. Jokes are its specialty.
Reiss's presentation was far more stand-up comedy than journalistic lecture. He clicked through choice Onion headlines and elaborated on their conception, all the while keeping the audience in endless fits of laughter.
But hidden among the wise cracks, there were morsels of journalistic wisdom to be gleaned. Comparing The Onion's work to that of mainstream media, Reiss pointed out similarities and differences. The Onion, of course, always came out on top.
Traditional newspaper reporters crank out stories and craft a headline as the finishing touch. At The Onion, writers pitch headlines first, and once approved, write the corresponding story. Reiss claimed this makes Onion writers active producers of news rather than passive recipients: "We make the news," he said. "We don't just sit around for the news to be made."
At first glance, headlines such as "Chipotle employer just gave guy ahead of you more rice" don't seem to carry much journalistic value. But Reiss argued that The Onion aspires to the highest of journalistic goals: "The point of journalism is to uncover what is unfair and unjust in the world," he said.
While The Onion supports itself through advertising, it has no qualms about mocking its advertisers. "There's no advertiser we bow down to. We're never at the whim of an advertiser," Reiss said.
Ever mindful of the media's job as watchdog, Reiss praised The Onion's temerity: "I like it when the paper takes on the role of idiot."
Happy to invent fictitious news, The Onion has at times duped unsuspecting folks. When a Beijing paper took an Onion story about remodeling the Capitol seriously, an indignant Chinese official remarked, "Only in America could someone get paid to tell lies." By failing to report important stories due to corporate loyalties, mainstream media are often just as deceptive as The Onion. The Onion, at least, is transparent about its fibbery.
Wrong.
I should have known better. It is, after all, The Onion. Jokes are its specialty.
Reiss's presentation was far more stand-up comedy than journalistic lecture. He clicked through choice Onion headlines and elaborated on their conception, all the while keeping the audience in endless fits of laughter.
But hidden among the wise cracks, there were morsels of journalistic wisdom to be gleaned. Comparing The Onion's work to that of mainstream media, Reiss pointed out similarities and differences. The Onion, of course, always came out on top.
Traditional newspaper reporters crank out stories and craft a headline as the finishing touch. At The Onion, writers pitch headlines first, and once approved, write the corresponding story. Reiss claimed this makes Onion writers active producers of news rather than passive recipients: "We make the news," he said. "We don't just sit around for the news to be made."
At first glance, headlines such as "Chipotle employer just gave guy ahead of you more rice" don't seem to carry much journalistic value. But Reiss argued that The Onion aspires to the highest of journalistic goals: "The point of journalism is to uncover what is unfair and unjust in the world," he said.
While The Onion supports itself through advertising, it has no qualms about mocking its advertisers. "There's no advertiser we bow down to. We're never at the whim of an advertiser," Reiss said.
Ever mindful of the media's job as watchdog, Reiss praised The Onion's temerity: "I like it when the paper takes on the role of idiot."
Happy to invent fictitious news, The Onion has at times duped unsuspecting folks. When a Beijing paper took an Onion story about remodeling the Capitol seriously, an indignant Chinese official remarked, "Only in America could someone get paid to tell lies." By failing to report important stories due to corporate loyalties, mainstream media are often just as deceptive as The Onion. The Onion, at least, is transparent about its fibbery.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Net Geners Are Ideal Bloggers
When blogger and talk show host Mark Finkelstein spoke in our class as a guest today, the very first thing he said struck me the most: "I was watching some of you IMing and text messaging before class. There's all this talk of independent media, but it's the media now. You're all broadcasters and producers whenever you communicate."
As college students and members of the Net Gen, we have been deemed "digital natives." We have never known life without the Internet. Take away our cell phones, iPods and laptops and we lose a lot more than efficient communication - we lose our identity. Who we are is defined by what we do with the technology we use.
As Finkelstein said, we are media producers. A December 2007 Pew Internet & American Life Project study found that 64 percent of online teens are content creators. We upload photos and videos. We create web pages and blogs. We join social networking sites.
Net Geners are ideal bloggers. When Educause researched characteristics of the Net Gen in their e-book titled "Educating the Net Generation," they found that we are intuitive visual communicators, are extremely social, crave interaction and expect immediacy in everything we do. We are community centered and global citizens. In jobs, we prioritize happiness and "doing something good" over money and fame.
Blogs are timely. Finkelstein said he often writes a post within an hour of an incident occurring. Blogs are visual. Finkelstein posts videos to complement the text of his blogs. Blogs are social. They thrive on comments and birth new conversations. Most importantly, blogs are influential. They reach people and make a difference.
"Blogging is about having an impact on the world," Finkelstein told us in class today.
If the Net Gen pools its skills and resources into purposeful blogging, our generational legacy will long outlive us. After all, nothing is truly lost in cyberspace.
As college students and members of the Net Gen, we have been deemed "digital natives." We have never known life without the Internet. Take away our cell phones, iPods and laptops and we lose a lot more than efficient communication - we lose our identity. Who we are is defined by what we do with the technology we use.
As Finkelstein said, we are media producers. A December 2007 Pew Internet & American Life Project study found that 64 percent of online teens are content creators. We upload photos and videos. We create web pages and blogs. We join social networking sites.
Net Geners are ideal bloggers. When Educause researched characteristics of the Net Gen in their e-book titled "Educating the Net Generation," they found that we are intuitive visual communicators, are extremely social, crave interaction and expect immediacy in everything we do. We are community centered and global citizens. In jobs, we prioritize happiness and "doing something good" over money and fame.
Blogs are timely. Finkelstein said he often writes a post within an hour of an incident occurring. Blogs are visual. Finkelstein posts videos to complement the text of his blogs. Blogs are social. They thrive on comments and birth new conversations. Most importantly, blogs are influential. They reach people and make a difference.
"Blogging is about having an impact on the world," Finkelstein told us in class today.
If the Net Gen pools its skills and resources into purposeful blogging, our generational legacy will long outlive us. After all, nothing is truly lost in cyberspace.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
A Rare Glimpse of Free Speech
Broadcasting live from Ithaca College on Friday, progressive radio talk host Thom Hartmann referred to the show as "anything goes Friday." He meant it, too. Audience members and callers were free to ask weekly guest Senator Bernie Sanders anything they wanted - from legislating truth in media to health care to corporate spending in presidential campaigns. The hodgepodge of topics surprised me, largely because I realized there is no way a corporate station would allow such an open, uncensored forum. In a country that guarantees free speech in its Constitution, our media has been silenced from telling the truth too many times. In light of this, hearing an honest, unrestrained conversation on the Thom Hartmann show was a real treat.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Journalism Classes Get a Makeover
The Chronicle of Higher Education gave a nod to new media and independent journalism in its article on revamped journalism classes. Journalism schools throughout the country are renovating their programs to focus on new media and entrepreneurship, mandating "multimedia bootcamps" and classes about the business of journalism.
Despite dwindling jobs, journalism schools are seeing record enrollments. Why? Students are reinventing journalism with new technology and creating their own jobs.
"There's not a great future in working for mainstream media," Christopher Harper, an associate professor of journalism at Temple University, said. "The future is for smart, hard-working students to band together, create their own media, and make a business out of it—and that's what a lot of them are doing."
Indy media to the rescue!
Despite dwindling jobs, journalism schools are seeing record enrollments. Why? Students are reinventing journalism with new technology and creating their own jobs.
"There's not a great future in working for mainstream media," Christopher Harper, an associate professor of journalism at Temple University, said. "The future is for smart, hard-working students to band together, create their own media, and make a business out of it—and that's what a lot of them are doing."
Indy media to the rescue!
Monday, September 21, 2009
Newspapers Get White House Support
Good news, journalism students who cling dearly to print media. President Obama does too. In an interview with Pittsburgh Post-Gazette editors and The Blade, Obama called himself a "big newspaper junkie" and called newspapers' survival "critical to the health of our democracy."
"I am concerned that if the direction of the news is all blogosphere, all opinions, with no serious fact-checking, no serious attempts to put stories in context, that what you will end up getting is people shouting at each other across the void but not a lot of mutual understanding," the President said.
While I would argue that online newspapers are no less accurate than their print counterparts with fact-checking, I do agree that a tangible newspaper reads differently than a digital one.
Obama said he would gladly look at legislation that would allow print newspapers to become non-profits and receive tax breaks. Swensen and Schmidt would be proud.
"I am concerned that if the direction of the news is all blogosphere, all opinions, with no serious fact-checking, no serious attempts to put stories in context, that what you will end up getting is people shouting at each other across the void but not a lot of mutual understanding," the President said.
While I would argue that online newspapers are no less accurate than their print counterparts with fact-checking, I do agree that a tangible newspaper reads differently than a digital one.
Obama said he would gladly look at legislation that would allow print newspapers to become non-profits and receive tax breaks. Swensen and Schmidt would be proud.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Journalism with a Heart
Journalism 101: Be objective.
Journalism 102: Find a face for every story.
Journalism 103: Know the rules, break the rules.
The lessons I learned in my introductory journalism classes came flooding back to me two nights ago as I watched Trouble the Water, Carl Deal and Tia Lessin’s documentary about Hurricane Katrina. As independent filmmakers, they filled in the gaping holes of reporting by the mainstream media.
Motivated by objectivity, the media turned robotic, mechanically divulging facts about the disaster. They reported from a distance, showing aerial shots of water and houses, but showed little of what was happening to people on the ground.
Deal and Lessin gave us stories. They humanized the devastation by tagging along with three charismatic New Orleans natives. “We wanted to tell the story the media wasn’t telling,” Lessin explained in a Q&A after the screening. “They weren’t showing Kimberly and Scott and Brian.”
Much of Deal and Lessin’s success came from breaking traditional media rules and creating their own. Their documentary has a fluid feel to it, characterized by raw home video and bouncing cameras following moving people.
“We didn’t do any of the typical documentary stuff you usually see in documentaries,” Lessin said. “We didn’t have a story treatment. We didn’t do any of those ‘talking head’ interviews where you sit people down and place lower thirds on them.”
Most significantly, Deal and Lessin admitted to forming close friendships with their subjects, and saw this as a strength rather than weakness of their piece. When asked about keeping their own biases out of the documentary, Deal replied: “No such thing. None.” Lessin added: “If you’re not bringing your passions into your work, you need to find another line of work.”
Spoken like proud non-robots.
Journalism 102: Find a face for every story.
Journalism 103: Know the rules, break the rules.
The lessons I learned in my introductory journalism classes came flooding back to me two nights ago as I watched Trouble the Water, Carl Deal and Tia Lessin’s documentary about Hurricane Katrina. As independent filmmakers, they filled in the gaping holes of reporting by the mainstream media.
Motivated by objectivity, the media turned robotic, mechanically divulging facts about the disaster. They reported from a distance, showing aerial shots of water and houses, but showed little of what was happening to people on the ground.
Deal and Lessin gave us stories. They humanized the devastation by tagging along with three charismatic New Orleans natives. “We wanted to tell the story the media wasn’t telling,” Lessin explained in a Q&A after the screening. “They weren’t showing Kimberly and Scott and Brian.”
Much of Deal and Lessin’s success came from breaking traditional media rules and creating their own. Their documentary has a fluid feel to it, characterized by raw home video and bouncing cameras following moving people.
“We didn’t do any of the typical documentary stuff you usually see in documentaries,” Lessin said. “We didn’t have a story treatment. We didn’t do any of those ‘talking head’ interviews where you sit people down and place lower thirds on them.”
Most significantly, Deal and Lessin admitted to forming close friendships with their subjects, and saw this as a strength rather than weakness of their piece. When asked about keeping their own biases out of the documentary, Deal replied: “No such thing. None.” Lessin added: “If you’re not bringing your passions into your work, you need to find another line of work.”
Spoken like proud non-robots.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Newspapers: Architects of Decay?
Sunday mornings in high school were glorious. I'd sprawl on my belly on the living room carpet, elbows propped, legs in the air (poster child for clipart reading graphics) and peruse The Buffalo News for hours.
When I got to college, Sundays with The Buffalo News earned a top spot on my list of things I missed from home. While I had access to The New York Times and local Ithaca papers on campus, they failed to capture my interest. I spent a few weeks being woefully ignorant of current affairs, then grudgingly switched the homepage on my laptop to CNN. Thus began my dependence on internet news.
Three years later, my morning ritual consists of scanning CNN.com for 5-10 minutes while I eat breakfast. Admittedly, I'm drawn to quirky headlines like "Elmo Joins H1N1 Flu Fight" and "Woman Sees Face of Virgin Mary in Grilled Cheese" first, but I do (usually) have time to read a few conventional articles.
Still, I miss The Buffalo News. When I visit Buffalo on school breaks, I relish my reunion with my beloved paper. Even better, my aunt and uncle get it daily, so it's no longer just a weekend affair.
Mind you, this is coming from a proud member of the Net Generation. I can't imagine my life without Facebook and e-mail and Google. But some things are better un-digitized. The Buffalo News online just isn't the same as the paper version. And my eyes still haven't forgiven me for reading the Twilight series online this summer.
To say print newspapers are in trouble is to say cell phones were a good idea. While the Daily Show's visit to the New York Times was riotous, the financial plight of newspapers is macabre.
Unless these wheezing anachronisms have some fresh air (er, money) pumped into them. One idea? Turn newspapers into nonprofit organizations by endowing them. Freed from the burden of a bottom line, newspapers could instead concentrate on quality, objective content. Ideal journalism and newspapers live to see another day. Can't do better than that.
Yes, it would take some arm-pulling and a change in the way we currently view newspapers. But in the words of Harold Wilson, "He who rejects change is the architect of decay. The only human institution which rejects progress is the cemetery."
Unless we do something, that's where our newspapers are headed.
When I got to college, Sundays with The Buffalo News earned a top spot on my list of things I missed from home. While I had access to The New York Times and local Ithaca papers on campus, they failed to capture my interest. I spent a few weeks being woefully ignorant of current affairs, then grudgingly switched the homepage on my laptop to CNN. Thus began my dependence on internet news.
Three years later, my morning ritual consists of scanning CNN.com for 5-10 minutes while I eat breakfast. Admittedly, I'm drawn to quirky headlines like "Elmo Joins H1N1 Flu Fight" and "Woman Sees Face of Virgin Mary in Grilled Cheese" first, but I do (usually) have time to read a few conventional articles.
Still, I miss The Buffalo News. When I visit Buffalo on school breaks, I relish my reunion with my beloved paper. Even better, my aunt and uncle get it daily, so it's no longer just a weekend affair.
Mind you, this is coming from a proud member of the Net Generation. I can't imagine my life without Facebook and e-mail and Google. But some things are better un-digitized. The Buffalo News online just isn't the same as the paper version. And my eyes still haven't forgiven me for reading the Twilight series online this summer.
To say print newspapers are in trouble is to say cell phones were a good idea. While the Daily Show's visit to the New York Times was riotous, the financial plight of newspapers is macabre.
Unless these wheezing anachronisms have some fresh air (er, money) pumped into them. One idea? Turn newspapers into nonprofit organizations by endowing them. Freed from the burden of a bottom line, newspapers could instead concentrate on quality, objective content. Ideal journalism and newspapers live to see another day. Can't do better than that.
Yes, it would take some arm-pulling and a change in the way we currently view newspapers. But in the words of Harold Wilson, "He who rejects change is the architect of decay. The only human institution which rejects progress is the cemetery."
Unless we do something, that's where our newspapers are headed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
