This is the way it's supposed to work - a great partnership between community, print and web:
New Mexico has a huge problem with DWI, and with DWI-related fatalities. It carries its own special topic on our site to house the related articles, and a special in- depth analysis last year in print is still timely as a background reference.This summer's death of Judith Scasserra-Cinciripini (see our stories of July 28 and July 29) was only the latest addition to New Mexico's continuing, tragic legacy of DWI.
The news stories stirred a passionate response in the form of reader comments on the Santa Fe New Mexican’s Web site, FreeNewMexican.com. One reader, Judy Yelsky, suggested that we create a forum for practical suggestions to counter the terrible impact of DWI, and later, another reader, Daniel Duby, suggested we include it in the print edition as well (download the pdf reproduction of the print page). As hundreds of people submitted ideas, and then voted on them, the Santa Fe County DWI Planning Council called to let us know they felt the time was right for a Public Forum, at which our readers’ suggestions, and others developed and tested across the country could be discussed and prioritized—and volunteers recruited to carry them forward. Web publisher and department head Michael Odza put coordinated with the Planning Council in developing the online ballot (also shown on the print page) to narrow down the best ideas (see the ballot at the end of the forum article). Michael was featured in a video news story on KOB-TV News for our efforts.
Michael Odza and I went to the forum meeting where M.O. blogged a real-time account on our regular New Mexican blog (the link is to the last entry of that night, but the previous entries covering the entire forum are to the right).
We were especially pleased to see our print brethren join us by incorporating the comments back into print, making the loop between reporting and public input come full circle. If you've read the blog entries below, you know that closing that gap, that disconnect, is a central tenet of our philosophy.
Wednesday, September 07, 2005
Sunday, February 13, 2005
Full text of Nathan's interview
As we posted last week, Nathan Alderman from J-New voices granted permission for us to run the full interview we did via email in preparation for his story. We include it because there's some additional issues and viewpoints that ran outside the focus of Nathan's series, but are still perhaps of interest to those following participatory journalism.
Here's the transcript:
1. According to Google, the Santa Fe New Mexican has been around for quite some time. How old is the paper, and can you give me a quick primer on its history?
Here's the transcript:
1. According to Google, the Santa Fe New Mexican has been around for quite some time. How old is the paper, and can you give me a quick primer on its history?
SD: The paper has been around for 155 years, and is the oldest continuously running paper west of the Mississippi. It's one of the last independent family owned newspapers around. It has been in the McKinney family for about 65 years, except for a brief period where it was sold to Gannett, but the family sued for breach of contract and regained ownership. It's nice to be part of a paper with such an independent history and tradition.
2. When did you first launch a Web site for the New Mexican?
MO: 1995
When did your Web presence change to offer both the subscription-only, direct-from-the-paper version and the Free New Mexican?
MO: June of 2004, on a trial (free) basis, then fully paid October 1, 2004.
What prompted that change, and what have the results been in terms of subscriptions and Web traffic?
MO: Inevitably, the paid vs. free argument faces every paper. We reasoned it didn't have to be an either/or situation. We lobbied hard for not only a continuation of the free site, to avoid losing the actual and potential advertising revenue based on the free site's 100,000+ unique users, but an expansion. It has allowed to us have some flexibility to experiment with different ideas, since we're not so completely bound to the print content , while giving the parent side a noticeable boost in paid subscriptions. After just four months, we've added over 1% to our subscription base, while experiencing an increase in traffic and usage of the free site, due to the increased variety and opportunities for reader interaction, breadth of news coverage, and useful reference material on Santa Fe.
3. What gave you the idea to add comments to each story as it was posted? Was the ability to reorder the front page by most-commented stories launched simultaneously with the comments, or did it come later?
MO: One of the key attributes of the Web as a medium is its capability for interaction. I would say we were inspired specifically by the now-classic and still-valid "Cluetrain Manifesto." We've had comments since 2001 in previous, out-sourced designs .
SD: When we developed the redesign and CMS in-house, we added the reordering feature, so that's been around since June 2004. No other paper's done this. It' s a direct way of letting the public decide what's important.
4. What percentage of your reporters have taken to reading the blog comments? How many of them are getting news leads from the comments? Are these numbers increasing? Are there any particular factors that make the comments useful in generating leads?
SD: the blog is a separate piece, but as to the comments on each story, more and more reporters are checking on it. Interestingly, editors as well are reading the comments and it often sparks ideas for follow up assignments to reporters.
Its not always about specific leads or tips; very often the loop is a little tighter. People may raise questions about a particular fact or issue, and the reporter does some verification or pursues an additional, different angle. Its my favorite symbiosis
in this loop: it generates better reporters, better news, and happier readers!
5. Has the New Mexican always been so strongly focused on community news? If not, when did that change, and what prompted the change?
SD: I believe the paper always had a community oriented direction; the web and these new participatory techniques simply realize a community-focused content in a more immediate, interactive and direct way.
6. When did you start enlisting readers to write articles and submit content for the New Mexican?
SD: about a year and a half ago.
What kinds of stories have resulted from that effort?
SD: Currently I have a continuing series from a gentleman who taught in Saudi Arabia; we've had eyewitness accounts from the Asian tsunami, and the Florida hurricanes; another series from a local travelling and working in China is in the works.
More often, however, our most interesting reader stories get generated from some event - see the fire log entry described on the new blog I mentioned,
and of course, the Mothers Uncensored section, detailed in the Media Center entry.
Do you have plans to expand the amount of community-created content on the site in the future?
SD: Most definitely! the door's wide open. I'm always looking for stuff, particularly at the hyperlocal, neighborhood level. I really want to tap into that.
7. How do you earn revenue from the site? Is it subsidized by subscriptions to the print edition, or does it bring in its own revenue? How successful have your revenue-generating efforts been thus far? Any ideas that have worked particularly well? Any new tactics you'd like to try in the future?
MO: The site is supported by classified and display advertising from the print edition carried on the free site; by online-only advertising, including banner ads, enhanced directory listings, Google ads and virtual tours, and recently, online-only enhancements of classified ads (photos and animated attention-getters) and subscription revenue.
We're successful in that revenue exceeds expenses, but it's been difficult to find the right Internet advertising sales staff or to involve the print advertising staff. We expect that self-service advertising, such as the classifieds, enhanced calendar listings, and photo sales will be significant new contributors to our revenue in 2005. We hope to add our own localized keyword search-based advertising, too.
8. How hands-on are you in editing users' comments and contributions?
SD: All the comments get read and proofed by either Michael or myself before we approve them to go live . It's standard forum policing: you have to watch for language, you have to control potential flame wars or trolls, keep discussions focused and on topic. That said, we have very very little trouble; if people know they're being moderated, they tend to behave. Having people use their real names - or at least having their real names on file - helps a lot ; you don't have that 'road rage' syndrome.
As to the more story -oriented reader pieces, they go through me, but they don't need much; usually just a little spelling or word-tightening. I try to preserve the writers' tone as much as possible. It's their voice, not mine. I want it real, I don't want it to read like some AP-style conforming piece. I may suggest a certain direction for an additional piece, or ask some questions for clarification.
On the Saudi series, John [ the Saudi series author] and I work very well together; he often provides a lot of links for definitions and context, and I'll check and verify those as well and often look for a few more links, so the pieces are becoming very blog-style that way, which you don't see a lot of in online news stories from newspaper sites. The web is all about links and connections and context, why aren't web editors using it? it does take time though, I don't do enough of that myself.
John often double checks my editing work once it gets posted online, too! its a nice team.
How did you come up with your user guidelines, and have you ever had to change them in reaction to events on the site?
SD:That was a big piece of research. Fortunately I have a tiny bit of law background from my undergrad days, and it came in handy when we developed the language. I looked at news sites that had a lot of commenting activity, studied their language and policies, and created a hybrid from all that I looked at, as well as my own language. I've never had to change them; we took great care to make them extremely thorough from the outset. I do have to send commenters to review them from time to time.
9. What other media outlets compete with The New Mexican for audience?
MO: Albuquerque is 60 miles away, so its major newspaper, Albuquerque Journal, is a competitor, as is the local free weekly, Santa Fe Reporter, plus an assortment of other niche publications on food and restaurants, the arts, kids, outdoors, etc.
How do you think the Free New Mexican's community features help it stand out from the competition?
SD: From a community perspective, I think we're giving people an outlet, a voice to be heard, a chance to sound out on both local news and issues and global events.
From a news perspective, we're finding ways to close the gap between the news and the public, between the news we're told we've experienced and the news we actually do experience. Journalists so much want to connect with their readers, but readers also need - very much in these times - to connect back into the loop, and not feel so alienated and distanced from the media. News doesnt happen in a vacuum, it happens to people, so we should let people have a part in the news process.
10. What sort of growth have you seen in the site's traffic since you added the new features?
MO: It's hard to filter out seasonal fluctuations and major news events like the presidential election, but pageviews for December 2003 were about 750,000 and were just over 5 million for December 2004. However, unique users per month has fluctuated between about 100,000 and 150,000 over the year. So what's really exploded is the depth to which visitors explore the site.
How many registered users do you now have?
MO: Close to 45,000
What percentage of them comment regularly?
SD: We have almost 2,000 commenters, of which roughly 15 percent contribute the top 80 percent of the posts , so far this year.
How many of them submit stories?
SD: Not that many, yet. I think they're adjusting to the idea, and I'd love to see more come in, but I'm flexible. The way people have used the forum to engage each other, the reporters, and even public figures seems to be the core community mechanism we're experiencing, that people are comfortable with. They use it in ways I never expected.
The hyperlocal reader-submitted story is a much touted symbol in participatory journalism discussions these days, but it shouldn't be the Holy Grail or trophy or yardstick; not all participatory journalism has to take on the form of reader submitted stories. Participatory jounalism is about giving people a voice, but you have to listen to that voice, its digital dialect, so to speak, and not impose a single mechanism. You have to watch what your community does with the tools you offer, and go with what they're most comfortable using and doing.
You can use strong responses on whatever tools are working for you to generate other kinds of participation. The Mothers Uncensored section started by a strong forum response. I saw something larger at play, asked for it, and then we got reader submitted stories and photos.
Your community may be diffferent. Maybe you get a lot of reader stories but not much forum activity. Thats OK. Maybe you don't have a forum system set up; are you inviting any kind of feedback on a reader submitted story, even if it's an e-mail back to you? post those emails - it's a start. Be creative, be flexible. Look for what works, and make it work further.
11. What factors make Santa Fe the right place for a community journalism site? How, if at all, have you tailored the design and content of your site to fit the needs and interests of the community
MO: Santa Fe is a fairly small town (65,000 population in the city proper, 130,000 in the county), with several important subcommunities: it is a very popular tourist destination, and has developed a strong repeat-vacation as well as second-home and retirement community. It is the seat of state government (political junkies), has a world-class arts community, a scientific community anchored in nearby Los Alamos National Laboratory and the Santa Fe Institute, an historic, long-established Hispanic community, a new and rapidly growing immigrant, largely Hispanic community, and a significant Native American population. Santa Fe has a vibrant gay community including two of the world's first gay resort retirement developments--and it is a center of New Age spiritual and alternative healing practitioners. Almost none of these communities, with the exception of the scientific, has its own local community presence online. We have developed "topics" or clusters of news, interactive tools and resources for each of these.
12. What sorts of stories and content draw the most comments and interest from readers?
SD: You never know, readers will surprise you. There are certain perennial hot-button issues here in Santa Fe; language, immigration, water, city development, Los Alamos Labs. Those generally create a fair amount of discussion. Gay and lesbian issues as well, we have a large community here, as Michael mentioned.Issues affecting any of those subcommunities will generate a lot of dialogue.
SD: But it is not always "all-local"; world events get a lot of attention. Again it's bringing your community together, allowing them a platform - and world events affect everybody, everyone thinks about whats happening out there to some degree - if people didn't care about world events, there'd be no CNN.
13. What have been the most satisfying aspects of the Free New Mexican's new community focus?
SD: Oh there's several gratifying moments: the many "thank you"s we get for giving people a voice and outlet; policy changes that occur as a result of reader feedback; the diversity of discussions; knowing that we're making a difference in that media/public gap.
What aspects have been the most frustrating?
SD: Theres not enough time to get to all of it! Our wishlist of what to implement and where to go from here is very long indeed, and we need about a 48 hour a day to do it all.
How do you choose which stories from the print edition go onto the FreeNewMexican each day? Are all the stories on the free site, or just some of them?
SD: This was the subject of some discussion with the print side, but we eventually settled on a quota of two stories by local staff reporters from a1, two from B1, one local sports, one from the special subject section (Wednesday -food, Thursday - outdoors, etc) and about 5 to 10 of the local columnists per week ( we're column heavy - that represents about a third of the total number of local columnists). Wire services don't follow this rule - i.e., if they have AP stories on the front page, that doesnt count against our 'quota', we can run as much as wire as we wish, even state or local.
The actual choice per night of which stories to select is up to the discretion of the night production person on duty. Its one of the more subtle aspects of the job, and I guide them a lot in the beginning, but they really enjoy having a hand in shaping the news our readers will wake up to in the morning.
They also know the perennial issues of interest: water, education, Los Alamos labs, the others that Ive mentioned.
Ill alert them if theres something specific I know of or that is developing news-wise from the day to watch for.
Aside from stories from the print edition and reader-submitted articles, do you draw from any other sources?
SD: We agressively update from the wire throughout the day, both hard news and lighter material for the evening edition (using the concept known as 'dayparting'). Today as an example, we have 16 updates plus 5 for the Sunset Edition. That's light - it can easily run close to 30 updates and about or 8 or 10 for Sunset.
We use AP for wire primarily, but Im investigating other services as well. We have agreements with some other sources and syndicates, and Ill also check an array of different news sources in the morning and chase down permissions on a case-by-case basis if something really jumps at me that the wire may not have yet.
Between that approach and the increased reader comments and stories, I think we've made up for the cut back on the printed material in some interesting ways that don't conflict or compete - we're offering the best of both possibilities.
Wednesday, February 09, 2005
Upcoming webinar
I've been given the honor of being a panelist on an upcoming webinar from the American Press Institute's subdivision known as the Media Center.
Entitled "The Vanishing Newspaper: Survival and Public Service in the Age of We Media", the panelists include:
The ongoing e-mails between the panelists are yielding some interesting discussions - if you're involved in this direction, do mark your calendar.
Entitled "The Vanishing Newspaper: Survival and Public Service in the Age of We Media", the panelists include:
- Phil Meyer, Knight Chair in Journalism, UNC, Chapel Hill, and author of The Vanishing Newspaper: Saving Journalism in the Information Age;
- yours truly;
- Mary Lou Fulton ,publisher, northwestvoice.com of the Bakersfield Californian;
- Tim Porter (http://www.timporter.com/firstdraft/), blogger.
The event is hosted and moderated by Jeff Jarvis, blogger and President, Advance.net.
The ongoing e-mails between the panelists are yielding some interesting discussions - if you're involved in this direction, do mark your calendar.
Our next departmental victim
Please give a warm and resounding welcome to new web team member Hunter Peress, who will be primarily an assistant to programmer Zeke, but I'm also training him for a bit of editorial /moderator backup as well.
What this means is that our wish list - and your wish list - for more site features, enhancements, etc will materialize sooner, rather than later.
Now that RSS and WAP are up on the site, what else is in the pike for community participation on the site? some of the things on my personal fast-track list include a set of reader blog tools; threaded comments; a general forum; and a few very cool tricks I wont divulge yet - though Zeke says its all possible!
And now with our good man Hunter on the team, this will all actually get done!
What this means is that our wish list - and your wish list - for more site features, enhancements, etc will materialize sooner, rather than later.
Now that RSS and WAP are up on the site, what else is in the pike for community participation on the site? some of the things on my personal fast-track list include a set of reader blog tools; threaded comments; a general forum; and a few very cool tricks I wont divulge yet - though Zeke says its all possible!
And now with our good man Hunter on the team, this will all actually get done!
freenewmexican.com profiled in J-Lab's 'New Voices'
Web publisher Michael Odza and myself were interviewed by Nathan Alderman of J-New Voices about how the addition of user comments to stories has affected the way we present and cover the news.
Nathan asked a detailed and intriguing set of questions by e-mail ( the full Q and A will be posted on this blog later, by permission of J-Voices), and he also talked to one of our stalwart readers Ed Campbell as well as reporter Steve Terrell, who has been chairing the main blog as of late.
There have been many examples documented in this blog of how readers have shaped and spurred news coverage: the reader reports on the summer fires of 2003, our Mothers Uncensored section, last year's uproar over the ignition interlock proposal during the legislative session, Yasmin Khan's follow-up piece inspired by all the comments on the Los Alamos highway accident in December, and others.
It happens in small ways, too: people post great additional sources and links in the comments, and often alert me or Michael to important information. Its an emergence of a micro-blogosphere within the framework of our site.
Nathan Alderman's interview is now live, and can be read here. Thanks to Nathan for the interview, and to Ed and Steve for playing.
Nathan asked a detailed and intriguing set of questions by e-mail ( the full Q and A will be posted on this blog later, by permission of J-Voices), and he also talked to one of our stalwart readers Ed Campbell as well as reporter Steve Terrell, who has been chairing the main blog as of late.
There have been many examples documented in this blog of how readers have shaped and spurred news coverage: the reader reports on the summer fires of 2003, our Mothers Uncensored section, last year's uproar over the ignition interlock proposal during the legislative session, Yasmin Khan's follow-up piece inspired by all the comments on the Los Alamos highway accident in December, and others.
It happens in small ways, too: people post great additional sources and links in the comments, and often alert me or Michael to important information. Its an emergence of a micro-blogosphere within the framework of our site.
Nathan Alderman's interview is now live, and can be read here. Thanks to Nathan for the interview, and to Ed and Steve for playing.
Tuesday, February 01, 2005
WAP you upside the head
of course, Zeke decided RSS wasnt enough, so we now have WAP, or the Wireless Application Protocol (read more about that here).
What it means is that you can now get your Santa Fe New Mexican content as a feed on your cell phone, pager, PDA or other device; check your device manual or service provider for details on how it fits into your particular unit and/or plan.
Our link is here; let us know how it works!
What it means is that you can now get your Santa Fe New Mexican content as a feed on your cell phone, pager, PDA or other device; check your device manual or service provider for details on how it fits into your particular unit and/or plan.
Our link is here; let us know how it works!
Friday, January 28, 2005
Santa Fe New Mexican RSS feeds go live
We arranged it by topic, with an initial launch of 52 separate feeds; here's the full list. Incidentally, I believe we are the first newspaper site in the state do this...
12.30 am Sat update: I also made a chicklet for each topic page, but its not displaying exactly where I want it to - Zeke will have to tweak this on Monday ...
12.30 am Sat update: I also made a chicklet for each topic page, but its not displaying exactly where I want it to - Zeke will have to tweak this on Monday ...
Wednesday, January 19, 2005
Santa Fe New Mexican now has RSS
I've fixed the rather silly oversight of not having a link to the Atom feed for this blog and our regular newspaper blog - which, by the way, is currently being chaired by reporter Steve Terrell, blogging the low-down on the state legislature session.
However, the best news of the day comes from me shamelessly begging Zeke to get RSS up and running on the main site, which he did very very quickly. It still needs some work and tweaks according to Zeke (he wants to do a separate feed for each topic, and other nifty ideas before we put those lovely little orange .gifs everywhere), but from my initial testing, it seems to come out clean - let me know your experience.
The RSS feed link is here. On FeedReader, the feed appears as a headline and brief, with links to the full story. There is also a link in the feed that should take you directly to the corresponding comments and commenting system, but there seems to be a bit of trouble with that (its only taking me to the story itself). We'll get that ironed out - along with other goodies from Zeke - tomorrow. We'll update you then.
However, the best news of the day comes from me shamelessly begging Zeke to get RSS up and running on the main site, which he did very very quickly. It still needs some work and tweaks according to Zeke (he wants to do a separate feed for each topic, and other nifty ideas before we put those lovely little orange .gifs everywhere), but from my initial testing, it seems to come out clean - let me know your experience.
The RSS feed link is here. On FeedReader, the feed appears as a headline and brief, with links to the full story. There is also a link in the feed that should take you directly to the corresponding comments and commenting system, but there seems to be a bit of trouble with that (its only taking me to the story itself). We'll get that ironed out - along with other goodies from Zeke - tomorrow. We'll update you then.
Thursday, January 13, 2005
Some Muslim alternative press and citizen journalism
Although there are some commendable press efforts to understand and document the complexity and diversity of Muslim thought throughout the Middle East, not much attention is focused on alternative Muslim voices making good use of digital media in the U.S.
Two sites in particular are worth examining: alt.muslim.com, and their colleagues at Muslim Wake Up!. (Disclosure: I had done some freelance volunteer non-compensated editing for the latter last spring).
alt.muslim is more of a "hard news" site, with editors in San Francisco, London and New York, keeping tabs on issues and developments throughout the Muslim world. In their words:
I'd say their analysis is more balanced rather than objective, as the site is by its nature filtered from an Islamic perspective (although a refreshingly modern one), but the analysis and commentary they do provide is intellectually sound and careful to consider all the viewpoints involved.
As promised, they are not without their humor - check out the little separator bar that changes on each refresh, with various self-descriptions for the site: 'cleared by airport security!', 'fatwas pending', 'member, axis of good', 'no assets to freeze', 'indefintely detained' or 'Your mysterious neighbors', among others.
An interesting current piece is the upcoming Brass Crescent Awards, where readers can vote on the merits of various Islamic blogs:
Categories include best overall, most articulate and well reasoned, best single posting, best new blog, best non-English blog, best Iraqi blog, etc.
I 'd need a day to go visit all these blogs, but I think the reading and perspectives will be very very interesting.
Muslim wake up! is a good deal more raw and edgy. It takes both professional and non-professional submissions of all kinds, and the reads are heartfelt, interesting, and full of real experience on real issues. While both sites have commenting available, MWU's seems to be more active and vigorous.
Their description:
They have been threatened and hacked by Muslim fundamentalists, and have called to task more mainstream American Muslim institutions such as CAIR on various issues. Even their humor pieces can raise hackles: an irreverent riff on CAIR from one of the writersdidn't go over well.
One of the most courageous and controversial sections on the site is "Sex and the Umma",a sex column, with additional related articles on sexuality and reproductive health issues in the Muslim world. To even acknowledge the existence of gay and lesbian Muslims, for example - let alone documenting their concerns - is an extremely brave journalistic stance.
The two sites are different enough in tone and approach to provide a good composite picture of modern progressive Islamic journalism. They are great examples of participatory journalism techniques in place, serving their community.
Two sites in particular are worth examining: alt.muslim.com, and their colleagues at Muslim Wake Up!. (Disclosure: I had done some freelance volunteer non-compensated editing for the latter last spring).
alt.muslim is more of a "hard news" site, with editors in San Francisco, London and New York, keeping tabs on issues and developments throughout the Muslim world. In their words:
We've designed this website to be an interactive news and discussion forum that helps promote a critical (and self-critical) analysis of issues regarding the Muslim community. Our editors provide brief overviews of issues affecting the Muslim world, along with extended commentary and discussion on a variety of topics, all designed to foster a community of people who want to become more informed and involved in the world around them.
We strive to provide an outlet for the following:
- Objective analysis using multiple sources of information and multiple viewpoints
- Attention to stories that are normally ignored by both the Muslim and western media
- An emphasis on introspection in order to challenge all of us to better our communities
- A sense of civility, humor and wit (well, this is entirely subjective!)
I'd say their analysis is more balanced rather than objective, as the site is by its nature filtered from an Islamic perspective (although a refreshingly modern one), but the analysis and commentary they do provide is intellectually sound and careful to consider all the viewpoints involved.
As promised, they are not without their humor - check out the little separator bar that changes on each refresh, with various self-descriptions for the site: 'cleared by airport security!', 'fatwas pending', 'member, axis of good', 'no assets to freeze', 'indefintely detained' or 'Your mysterious neighbors', among others.
An interesting current piece is the upcoming Brass Crescent Awards, where readers can vote on the merits of various Islamic blogs:
Today, the Islamsphere is forging a new synthesis of Islam and modernity, and is the intellectual heir to the traditions of philosophy and learning that was once the hallmark of Islamic civilization - a heritage scarcely recognizable today in the Islamic world after a century's ravages of colonialism, tyrants, and religious fundamentalism....
Categories include best overall, most articulate and well reasoned, best single posting, best new blog, best non-English blog, best Iraqi blog, etc.
I 'd need a day to go visit all these blogs, but I think the reading and perspectives will be very very interesting.
Muslim wake up! is a good deal more raw and edgy. It takes both professional and non-professional submissions of all kinds, and the reads are heartfelt, interesting, and full of real experience on real issues. While both sites have commenting available, MWU's seems to be more active and vigorous.
Their description:
Muslim WakeUp! seeks to bring together Muslims and non-Muslims in America and around the globe in efforts that celebrate cultural and spiritual diversity, tolerance, and understanding. Through online and offline media, events, and community activities, Muslim WakeUp! champions an interpretation of Islam that celebrates the Oneness of God and the Unity of God’s creation through the encouragement of the human creative spirit and the free exchange of ideas, in an atmosphere that is filled with compassion and free of intimidation, authoritarianism, and dogmatism. In all its activities, Muslim WakeUp! attempts to reflect a deep belief in justice and against all forms of oppression, bigotry, sexism, and racism.
They have been threatened and hacked by Muslim fundamentalists, and have called to task more mainstream American Muslim institutions such as CAIR on various issues. Even their humor pieces can raise hackles: an irreverent riff on CAIR from one of the writersdidn't go over well.
One of the most courageous and controversial sections on the site is "Sex and the Umma",a sex column, with additional related articles on sexuality and reproductive health issues in the Muslim world. To even acknowledge the existence of gay and lesbian Muslims, for example - let alone documenting their concerns - is an extremely brave journalistic stance.
The two sites are different enough in tone and approach to provide a good composite picture of modern progressive Islamic journalism. They are great examples of participatory journalism techniques in place, serving their community.
some musings from our boss
Team leader Michael Odza's blog gets an update -let's hope he keeps a semi-regular schedule!
Wednesday, January 12, 2005
Epic 2014: a futurist projection for media/news convergence
A very interesting link was posted to the NAA listserv. This eight minute video clip spinning out a hypothetical projection of news convergence in 2014, was created by Robin Sloan and Matt Thompson, both who write for Poynter.org, a journalism research and development organization.The Poynter link in the previous sentence is a description by Robin of the reaction to the clip.
I must have been hiding in a cave to have missed this one when it came out in November. Better late than never, however, and I'm glad Bill Blevins posted it to the NAA listserv.
In Robin's Poynter post, he mentions that for all the linking and traffic his piece generated, not a lot of discussion occured. I'm game to engage in one, unless everyone feels its old news.
It certainly created a stir - indeed, struck fear - on the NAA; Bill titled his post with the link, "Do you like scary movies?"
Scary?
I think its exhilarating!
Its very interesting indeed, and probably not too far off the mark... My two cents on what its impact is for for the local papers in the short term:
Im not sure newspapers as a news gathering organization would have to vanish entirely, however, but that role is going to face increasingly stiff competition. People will still want valuable, relevant content, especially at the local level.
But the technology exists now - and the clip draws this out to some interesting endpoints - for someone, anyone, everyone - to potentially do it better.
The question becomes: is there room for a traditional news organisation in an increasingly wide and customizable ocean of information?
Yes, but each news organization is going to have to ask themselves these kinds of questions, and ask them now:
1)What are your strengths?
2)are those strengths still meaningful and relevant, given the other kinds of sources of news and media people are turning to? ( i.e., for starters: who are your heavy local bloggers, and are they connecting with an audience in a way that youre not? any strong local community forum sites talking about local issues?)
3) will you invest in the technology necessary to make your strengths accesible across new and developing platforms?
4) If you don't feel your strengths are as meaningful and relevant as they could or should be, then begin thinking of ways in which they could be more connected to your readership in both content and delivery method (this begs a whole separate set of hard self-examining questions for your organization).
There is a lot of discussion on the net lately re the journalistic merits of bloggers and what they bring to the table, and what each camp might learn from the other. I envision traditional newsroom functions shifting slightly (and I find myself thinking through a very detailed model for this), marrying the insight, freshness, immediacy and connectivity offerings of the best blogging with the rigorous verifcation and fact finding techniques of traditional journalism.
Traditional newsrooms will have to swallow the seemingly bitter pill of the whole ethics/bias/transparency issue, but once they do, they can begin to hold their own and offer some of their unique resources to the information mix.
The clip should be a strong wakeup call for news organizations and professionals to look at these trends head on - and one can either be inspired and challenged by it and join the mix, or else cower in fear and feel defeated by it, clinging to a way of thinking about news that is rapidly changing.
I'm so inspired by what's ahead it makes me dizzy!
I must have been hiding in a cave to have missed this one when it came out in November. Better late than never, however, and I'm glad Bill Blevins posted it to the NAA listserv.
In Robin's Poynter post, he mentions that for all the linking and traffic his piece generated, not a lot of discussion occured. I'm game to engage in one, unless everyone feels its old news.
It certainly created a stir - indeed, struck fear - on the NAA; Bill titled his post with the link, "Do you like scary movies?"
Scary?
I think its exhilarating!
Its very interesting indeed, and probably not too far off the mark... My two cents on what its impact is for for the local papers in the short term:
Im not sure newspapers as a news gathering organization would have to vanish entirely, however, but that role is going to face increasingly stiff competition. People will still want valuable, relevant content, especially at the local level.
But the technology exists now - and the clip draws this out to some interesting endpoints - for someone, anyone, everyone - to potentially do it better.
The question becomes: is there room for a traditional news organisation in an increasingly wide and customizable ocean of information?
Yes, but each news organization is going to have to ask themselves these kinds of questions, and ask them now:
1)What are your strengths?
2)are those strengths still meaningful and relevant, given the other kinds of sources of news and media people are turning to? ( i.e., for starters: who are your heavy local bloggers, and are they connecting with an audience in a way that youre not? any strong local community forum sites talking about local issues?)
3) will you invest in the technology necessary to make your strengths accesible across new and developing platforms?
4) If you don't feel your strengths are as meaningful and relevant as they could or should be, then begin thinking of ways in which they could be more connected to your readership in both content and delivery method (this begs a whole separate set of hard self-examining questions for your organization).
There is a lot of discussion on the net lately re the journalistic merits of bloggers and what they bring to the table, and what each camp might learn from the other. I envision traditional newsroom functions shifting slightly (and I find myself thinking through a very detailed model for this), marrying the insight, freshness, immediacy and connectivity offerings of the best blogging with the rigorous verifcation and fact finding techniques of traditional journalism.
Traditional newsrooms will have to swallow the seemingly bitter pill of the whole ethics/bias/transparency issue, but once they do, they can begin to hold their own and offer some of their unique resources to the information mix.
The clip should be a strong wakeup call for news organizations and professionals to look at these trends head on - and one can either be inspired and challenged by it and join the mix, or else cower in fear and feel defeated by it, clinging to a way of thinking about news that is rapidly changing.
I'm so inspired by what's ahead it makes me dizzy!
More of what we do - courtesy of MediaCenter
One of the leading exponents in this field, JD Lasica, was kind enough to write about us on the Media Center's "morph" blog. There you'll find the very latest of what we've been doing.
JD's piece prompted the setup of this particular blog; it was time to gather the random notes and thoughts of the work here in Santa Fe into one space and post it for anyone who may be interested.
BTW, JD's latest work centers around OurMedia.org, a new open-source citizens media project slated to launch Jan 21st. For the art community here in Santa Fe, this may especially be worth checking out, as he's taking in a vast array of material - video blogs, photo albums, original music, documentary journalism, music videos, children's tales, Flash animations, student films. The material will be freely distributed under a Creative Commons license.
JD's piece prompted the setup of this particular blog; it was time to gather the random notes and thoughts of the work here in Santa Fe into one space and post it for anyone who may be interested.
BTW, JD's latest work centers around OurMedia.org, a new open-source citizens media project slated to launch Jan 21st. For the art community here in Santa Fe, this may especially be worth checking out, as he's taking in a vast array of material - video blogs, photo albums, original music, documentary journalism, music videos, children's tales, Flash animations, student films. The material will be freely distributed under a Creative Commons license.
Web site metrics shape editorial choices
This idea is getting a lot of attention and debate lately. It first surfaced (to my knowledge) with a story about a newspaper in Chile that drives its print content based on the number of clicks the web stories generate. An abridged version:
A similar domestic experience is described by Vlae Kershner (of SFgate.com), in this article from Grade The News.
Its a challenging dilemma, but it's important to understand the distinction between what is popular to the readers and what is important to them. Hits only tell half of the story. If you have some feedback mechanisms and participatory tools (commenting system, direct email links to reporters, etc), you can better separate what matters to readership as opposed to what's merely popular. Our reporters now are beginning to pick up on these feedback cues and follow up based on this kind of direct involvement from the readership.
Our most commented-on stories are not necessarily the ones with the most hits, and some highly trafficked stories don't generate much participation. Just because a story is highly read it doesnt mean it matters a lot in a reader's daily life.
What news, then, did readers choose in a week when a dozen world leaders gathered in Santiago for an important trade meeting? Among the top stories: Where Secretary of State Colin Powell went to dinner and what he ate (shrimp with couscous). Also, a rundown — with a photo of scantily clad waitresses — of which delegations gave the best tips (Japan).
"This is very experimental, and it seems to be working," says Axel Pricket, a senior editor at LUN. "But," he hesitates, "how are you going to get a journalist to cover an important visit, say, of the Chinese trade minister when you know in the evening everyone will click on the story of the scantily clad girls?" No editor, he points out, is going to be able to say: "Let's showcase an issue which is totally uninteresting to the public."
"And why in the world would they want to?" roars [publisher] Edwards, dismissing arguments that it is a newspaper's role to educate and inform the public, and rolling his eyes at the charge that the media is causing a "dumbing down" of society.
It's an alarming success, says Orville Schell, dean of the graduate school of journalism at the University of California, Berkeley. He says it bodes badly for the future of serious journalism. "The quest for eyeballs has soundly trumped good, sound news judgement," he says. "Market forces have established yet another beach head in the publishing world, albeit, through an online fifth column."
A similar domestic experience is described by Vlae Kershner (of SFgate.com), in this article from Grade The News.
Its a challenging dilemma, but it's important to understand the distinction between what is popular to the readers and what is important to them. Hits only tell half of the story. If you have some feedback mechanisms and participatory tools (commenting system, direct email links to reporters, etc), you can better separate what matters to readership as opposed to what's merely popular. Our reporters now are beginning to pick up on these feedback cues and follow up based on this kind of direct involvement from the readership.
Our most commented-on stories are not necessarily the ones with the most hits, and some highly trafficked stories don't generate much participation. Just because a story is highly read it doesnt mean it matters a lot in a reader's daily life.
global coverage at the hyperlocal level
Yes, the two can - and should - go together.
Much of the citizen/participatory journalism efforts are driven by the theory of hyperlocalism, i.e., citizen reporters at a very micro/neighborhood level. If you are new to the idea of citizen/participatory journalism, here's an excellent primer by Mark Glaser. Nathan Alderman at J-Lab: The Institute for Interactive Journalism in College Park, MD, also highlights some of these in greater detail in this nice survey.
It's a brilliant and necessary direction. As discussions roil over how newspapers can re-orient themselves in the wake of blogs and these other current trends, many pundits are advocating a similar hyperlocal approach, as in Barry Parr's piece..
I don't disagree at all with the hyperlocal approach, but I do think removing global and international news coverage entirely from a news mix is wrong. As I posted to Barry's piece:
Web content managers should well look into the work of Doug McGill and his work in tying global trends to local interests. As passionate as I am about the hyperlocal trend, I'm equally passionate on this point too.
On this front, we have an interesting series on Saudi Arabia written by a gentleman who taught English there off and on for over twenty years. The topic is timely, relevant, his experience invaluable.
In terms of wire coverage, I work generally with three factors:
1) finding themes and issues that your audience can connect to. Water's a big issue here - so how do other countries deal with water conservation and the politics of natural resources? Tie your wire coverage to local issues.
2)We try to find stories or analysis when possible that other mainstream news outlets might overlook. Many times we've brought to the fore little known information and alternative coverage that you WON't get on other sites. As reader Aimee Broustra wrote in to thank us, "Formerly, I subscribed to the International Herald Tribune. Since the New York Times purchased IHT from the Washington Post in an unfair monopolistic leverage, the NewMexican is my only source of international news. Bravo to your coverage of world events!" Thank you Aimee for permission to use your quote. (Incidentally, she is no stranger to world media, her husband having written and published several economic articles and newsletters while based in Paris).
3) Get a forum attached to your stories and start to learn what people respond to. Don't pick a story on the sole basis that it will generate a strong discussion, but if you get a sense as to what your community responds to - what matters to them - , you can match accordingly.
Much of the citizen/participatory journalism efforts are driven by the theory of hyperlocalism, i.e., citizen reporters at a very micro/neighborhood level. If you are new to the idea of citizen/participatory journalism, here's an excellent primer by Mark Glaser. Nathan Alderman at J-Lab: The Institute for Interactive Journalism in College Park, MD, also highlights some of these in greater detail in this nice survey.
It's a brilliant and necessary direction. As discussions roil over how newspapers can re-orient themselves in the wake of blogs and these other current trends, many pundits are advocating a similar hyperlocal approach, as in Barry Parr's piece..
I don't disagree at all with the hyperlocal approach, but I do think removing global and international news coverage entirely from a news mix is wrong. As I posted to Barry's piece:
Don't underestimate or assume you know what your readers want online until you get to know them.
I suggest introducing comments on articles, and for the purposes of learning your community set a system where comments have to be approved before they go live. You really get to know the community, and what their interests are.
The results may surprise you; a lot of international and national stories get a huge amount of comments. This is why I disagree strongly with the idea of blowing off national and international news as a mere add on.
Sure people can go to other sources, but if you are a news site, most of your traffic is going to be from other people at their workplace; they don't have the time or want to risk being seen by their boss to sift through 5 different sites for their news. You need to provide a relevant mix, but make it unique and hand pick those stories as opposed to running a bland autonomous AP feed. Even AP runs material not found in the mainstream if you dig hard enough - and your readers will respect you for it. You dont have to inundate and it should never eclipse local coverage - but dont make the mistake of blowing it off.
Web content managers should well look into the work of Doug McGill and his work in tying global trends to local interests. As passionate as I am about the hyperlocal trend, I'm equally passionate on this point too.
On this front, we have an interesting series on Saudi Arabia written by a gentleman who taught English there off and on for over twenty years. The topic is timely, relevant, his experience invaluable.
In terms of wire coverage, I work generally with three factors:
1) finding themes and issues that your audience can connect to. Water's a big issue here - so how do other countries deal with water conservation and the politics of natural resources? Tie your wire coverage to local issues.
2)We try to find stories or analysis when possible that other mainstream news outlets might overlook. Many times we've brought to the fore little known information and alternative coverage that you WON't get on other sites. As reader Aimee Broustra wrote in to thank us, "Formerly, I subscribed to the International Herald Tribune. Since the New York Times purchased IHT from the Washington Post in an unfair monopolistic leverage, the NewMexican is my only source of international news. Bravo to your coverage of world events!" Thank you Aimee for permission to use your quote. (Incidentally, she is no stranger to world media, her husband having written and published several economic articles and newsletters while based in Paris).
3) Get a forum attached to your stories and start to learn what people respond to. Don't pick a story on the sole basis that it will generate a strong discussion, but if you get a sense as to what your community responds to - what matters to them - , you can match accordingly.
Tuesday, January 11, 2005
Connecting with your reader: news as a filtered social response
Too often, we think of journalism as "reporting news". And yet a huge concern in journalism is "how to make your news *story* connect with your reader". It is the classic question, almost a cliche - but in an age of increasing media distrust, its a question that still needs some thought.
It involves examining what news is, what a news story is, and who gets lost in that transformation.
First, what makes an "event" different than "news"?
News are events that matter, that are deemed to have some kind of relevance to our lives. So, news might be defined as an event plus some kind of social reaction or response to that event. Extramarital affairs are not news; presidential extramarital affairs are news in this country because this society deems that the private activities of public officials matter - for any myriad of reasons. How "big" a news story is is in part determined by how intense the event's impact will be on the social psyche.
But "news" happens on all levels of scale. A house on fire is an event. It is "news" to its occupants, the neighborhood - its society. If the fire is in a town 10 states from you, it probably won't be "news" to you, but that doesn't diminish its relevance to the society (the homeowners, the neighborhood) that it affects.
Traditional journalism filters this by taking an event plus its social response ("news"), then feeding it ("the news story") back to the individual in that society that responded, and hoping to engage a secondary response (the classic "connect with your reader"). By this time you are far removed from the actual event, it having been filtered by both the social response, then re-filtered and compressed by the gatherer/shaper (news media) that tries to win a secondary response.
It is a loop unaware of itself. News doesn't operate in a vacuum, it's an integral part of the society it happens in.
It's a challenge to overcome such distancing this loop self-creates: as readers, we choke on a condensed, filtered social nugget (the news story) that we are asked to respond to ( "the reader connection"), while subliminally knowing we are part of it. As journalists, we have to apply our standard journalistic techniques in a way that shortens this distance, but too often the filtering and transforming of news into a news story by the infrastructure of traditional journalism increases this distance, not lessens it.
While journalists desperately want to connect with us, they lose sight of the readers equally intense need to connect back into some part of this loop, be it the news story or the media that distributes it or maybe even the very social network itself that defined the event as news. People feel increasingly alienated, disconnected, and the media's (until now) unilateral dissemination of information may be playing a small, subconscious role in that modern malaise.
So, we've established that news is determined by a social response. But societies do not make up individuals; individuals make up societies.
What would occur if a society connects and reacts to events not as an amorphous mass requiring filtration and compression only to re-feed itself, but as a self - disclosing collective of individuals articulating its own responses?
The society itself would determine what is "news" by openly sharing their *individual responses* to events, in the public platform of participatory journalism. Such a transparency would give a more accurate and truthful record and reflection of what that society self-determines to be "news", as everyone's response is openly disclosed and shared.
This doesn't obfuscate the need for traditional journalism, but the traditional journalism apparatus should understand the nature of this social loop, and be aware of its role in it.
One of the web's greatest strengths is its ability to make social connections. Since news are events that matter (i.e.,are deemed to have some kind of social impact or response), using the socialization strengths of the web allows people to fully interact both with the events themselves (by telling the story),and with the way and manner that those events are disseminated by others (other citizen reporters, and/or a news organization).
News organizations that support such public reporting and community initiatives can help restore their lost media trust by bonding the readership to a news source that actually includes and responds to the society it reports to.
In my view, that’s how 21st century journalism will start to answer the classic question posed at the beginning: You connect to the reader by including them, involving them, responding to them, allowing a voice and a platform to articulate the news that happens to them as well as the news that happened to them that you tell them about.
It involves examining what news is, what a news story is, and who gets lost in that transformation.
First, what makes an "event" different than "news"?
News are events that matter, that are deemed to have some kind of relevance to our lives. So, news might be defined as an event plus some kind of social reaction or response to that event. Extramarital affairs are not news; presidential extramarital affairs are news in this country because this society deems that the private activities of public officials matter - for any myriad of reasons. How "big" a news story is is in part determined by how intense the event's impact will be on the social psyche.
But "news" happens on all levels of scale. A house on fire is an event. It is "news" to its occupants, the neighborhood - its society. If the fire is in a town 10 states from you, it probably won't be "news" to you, but that doesn't diminish its relevance to the society (the homeowners, the neighborhood) that it affects.
Traditional journalism filters this by taking an event plus its social response ("news"), then feeding it ("the news story") back to the individual in that society that responded, and hoping to engage a secondary response (the classic "connect with your reader"). By this time you are far removed from the actual event, it having been filtered by both the social response, then re-filtered and compressed by the gatherer/shaper (news media) that tries to win a secondary response.
It is a loop unaware of itself. News doesn't operate in a vacuum, it's an integral part of the society it happens in.
It's a challenge to overcome such distancing this loop self-creates: as readers, we choke on a condensed, filtered social nugget (the news story) that we are asked to respond to ( "the reader connection"), while subliminally knowing we are part of it. As journalists, we have to apply our standard journalistic techniques in a way that shortens this distance, but too often the filtering and transforming of news into a news story by the infrastructure of traditional journalism increases this distance, not lessens it.
While journalists desperately want to connect with us, they lose sight of the readers equally intense need to connect back into some part of this loop, be it the news story or the media that distributes it or maybe even the very social network itself that defined the event as news. People feel increasingly alienated, disconnected, and the media's (until now) unilateral dissemination of information may be playing a small, subconscious role in that modern malaise.
So, we've established that news is determined by a social response. But societies do not make up individuals; individuals make up societies.
What would occur if a society connects and reacts to events not as an amorphous mass requiring filtration and compression only to re-feed itself, but as a self - disclosing collective of individuals articulating its own responses?
The society itself would determine what is "news" by openly sharing their *individual responses* to events, in the public platform of participatory journalism. Such a transparency would give a more accurate and truthful record and reflection of what that society self-determines to be "news", as everyone's response is openly disclosed and shared.
This doesn't obfuscate the need for traditional journalism, but the traditional journalism apparatus should understand the nature of this social loop, and be aware of its role in it.
One of the web's greatest strengths is its ability to make social connections. Since news are events that matter (i.e.,are deemed to have some kind of social impact or response), using the socialization strengths of the web allows people to fully interact both with the events themselves (by telling the story),and with the way and manner that those events are disseminated by others (other citizen reporters, and/or a news organization).
News organizations that support such public reporting and community initiatives can help restore their lost media trust by bonding the readership to a news source that actually includes and responds to the society it reports to.
In my view, that’s how 21st century journalism will start to answer the classic question posed at the beginning: You connect to the reader by including them, involving them, responding to them, allowing a voice and a platform to articulate the news that happens to them as well as the news that happened to them that you tell them about.
The Fire Log
New Mexico is high mountainous desert, and every summer the threat and reality of fires is very real. The summer of 2003 proved to be a precarious one (but not disastrous), and provided our first real experience of the ptential of citizen journalism.
We've always allowed individual comments on each story, and its now become one of the cornerstones of our participatory work.
When comments on the regular fire stories started to show reader frustration between the Forest Service press releases or print staff reports and the actual amount of smoke /asthma they were experiencing, I set up a dedicated article called the "fire log", asking people to report experiences, health conditions, fire visibility, etc in their specific areas. It ran for over a week, was consistently in the top ten, and generally had more traffic than the official stories and even my thrice daily updates.
We started the piece on July 16,2003. It ran three pages of posts (about 14 or so, and when I pulled stats, it ranked as the 5th most visited story across the entire site for the month. The most revealing stat, however, was that no other fire story in that date range ranked in the top 10.
Here was real-time human experience that was very very different from what was officially being passed down, and was receiving more hits and traffic than any "official news". Since more people were reading it than were posting, peoples posts were being treated as a legitimate *source* of news - and were relying on it over official coverage. People defining their own social response to events,
trusting a neighbor over a traditional source.
It's reminiscent of Amazon's success with their ratings, buddy-system and reccomendations functions. Instinctively, I would rather have a friend (or at least someone's whose interests are close to mine) tell me about a new CD rather than some outside agent or source. To trust a source of information, one has to be connected to it, in some way.
Why traditional media can sometimes lose that trust I'll explore later on, but the fire log experience was the first profound early lesson we discovered about media, trust, and citizenry - and we've looked ahead ever since.
It also got us a mention in Online Journalism Review at the time (although the links in that article back to our site aren't functional, as this was a redesign ago).
We've always allowed individual comments on each story, and its now become one of the cornerstones of our participatory work.
When comments on the regular fire stories started to show reader frustration between the Forest Service press releases or print staff reports and the actual amount of smoke /asthma they were experiencing, I set up a dedicated article called the "fire log", asking people to report experiences, health conditions, fire visibility, etc in their specific areas. It ran for over a week, was consistently in the top ten, and generally had more traffic than the official stories and even my thrice daily updates.
We started the piece on July 16,2003. It ran three pages of posts (about 14 or so, and when I pulled stats, it ranked as the 5th most visited story across the entire site for the month. The most revealing stat, however, was that no other fire story in that date range ranked in the top 10.
Here was real-time human experience that was very very different from what was officially being passed down, and was receiving more hits and traffic than any "official news". Since more people were reading it than were posting, peoples posts were being treated as a legitimate *source* of news - and were relying on it over official coverage. People defining their own social response to events,
trusting a neighbor over a traditional source.
It's reminiscent of Amazon's success with their ratings, buddy-system and reccomendations functions. Instinctively, I would rather have a friend (or at least someone's whose interests are close to mine) tell me about a new CD rather than some outside agent or source. To trust a source of information, one has to be connected to it, in some way.
Why traditional media can sometimes lose that trust I'll explore later on, but the fire log experience was the first profound early lesson we discovered about media, trust, and citizenry - and we've looked ahead ever since.
It also got us a mention in Online Journalism Review at the time (although the links in that article back to our site aren't functional, as this was a redesign ago).
Who we are and what we do
My name is Stefan Dill, and I am the web editor for the web site of the Santa Fe New Mexican, the city's daily newspaper.
It is a very interesting gig, especially since the rest of the paper has been willing to let the web department explore some ideas regarding the socialization and democratization of the news process. While some caution and skepticism was voiced initially, the world hasn't fallen, and the web department is committed to developing the participatory model ever further.
about me (in the name of transparency)
I came to journalism via radio. In a previous lifetime, I was a dj/announcer for a small-town (pop. 2500) rural radio station, interviewing celebs and local and national politicans as they came through. No one else had the nerve or interest to do it, so it fell to me by default. I learned my editing skills on that job as well, trying to make coherent sense out of unintelligible, misspelled, and half-empty press releases (I need to know where that farm auction is, please) on the fly as I read these down raw on the 5 o clock news bulletin. I did some basic web design for my music work as well, and between the two, was able to get my foot in this rather wide door. My formal education is in Business Admin (with a lot of law) and an MM in music.
I've always been a voracious news consumer, and trained myself early in my youth to read a wide array of different news sources. We have a comprehensive list on our site of alternative media, as part of a strong collection of various resource guides.
But beyond alternative media of any stripe or slant lies the person the news happens to, that it matters to. That's the beauty and importance of citizen journalism, and why we're passionate about this movement: because it simply matters.
I manage the news and content for the site, but I am merely a small cog in a pretty amazing and sometimes overworked wheel. The team consists of our own in-house programmer Zeke, a production night crew of three very patient folk (Sam, Stephanie, Liz), and our boss Michael Odza, the department leader who oversees it all with great enthusiasm, support and ideas. He'sa great thinker; here's his blog - he needs to update it more often...
The constantly evolving nexus of information technology, modern social culture, and existing journalism paradigms is a fascinating and thrilling place to be. We're committed to exploring and developing that nexus as much as possible, and we'll document the results here.
Share your own thoughts and experiences with us too - whether you are a news reader, or news professional, what's happening to you as you stand on that three-way intersection? what do you see from that vantage point? I'm particularly interested in hearing from the news consumer, not just news pros. For me, an area that seems a bit overlooked in citizen journalism research and discussions is what the non-journalist citizen (the passive consumer of citizen generated news) thinks.
I'm reminded of a music piece I wrote, many groups ago - a furious little metal/jazz piece called "How the Nexus Affects Us". Indeed, the described nexus affects us all, and the delightful thing is that every single person will help shape it, by their choices, their preferences, and/or their work.
It is a very interesting gig, especially since the rest of the paper has been willing to let the web department explore some ideas regarding the socialization and democratization of the news process. While some caution and skepticism was voiced initially, the world hasn't fallen, and the web department is committed to developing the participatory model ever further.
about me (in the name of transparency)
I came to journalism via radio. In a previous lifetime, I was a dj/announcer for a small-town (pop. 2500) rural radio station, interviewing celebs and local and national politicans as they came through. No one else had the nerve or interest to do it, so it fell to me by default. I learned my editing skills on that job as well, trying to make coherent sense out of unintelligible, misspelled, and half-empty press releases (I need to know where that farm auction is, please) on the fly as I read these down raw on the 5 o clock news bulletin. I did some basic web design for my music work as well, and between the two, was able to get my foot in this rather wide door. My formal education is in Business Admin (with a lot of law) and an MM in music.
I've always been a voracious news consumer, and trained myself early in my youth to read a wide array of different news sources. We have a comprehensive list on our site of alternative media, as part of a strong collection of various resource guides.
But beyond alternative media of any stripe or slant lies the person the news happens to, that it matters to. That's the beauty and importance of citizen journalism, and why we're passionate about this movement: because it simply matters.
I manage the news and content for the site, but I am merely a small cog in a pretty amazing and sometimes overworked wheel. The team consists of our own in-house programmer Zeke, a production night crew of three very patient folk (Sam, Stephanie, Liz), and our boss Michael Odza, the department leader who oversees it all with great enthusiasm, support and ideas. He'sa great thinker; here's his blog - he needs to update it more often...
The constantly evolving nexus of information technology, modern social culture, and existing journalism paradigms is a fascinating and thrilling place to be. We're committed to exploring and developing that nexus as much as possible, and we'll document the results here.
Share your own thoughts and experiences with us too - whether you are a news reader, or news professional, what's happening to you as you stand on that three-way intersection? what do you see from that vantage point? I'm particularly interested in hearing from the news consumer, not just news pros. For me, an area that seems a bit overlooked in citizen journalism research and discussions is what the non-journalist citizen (the passive consumer of citizen generated news) thinks.
I'm reminded of a music piece I wrote, many groups ago - a furious little metal/jazz piece called "How the Nexus Affects Us". Indeed, the described nexus affects us all, and the delightful thing is that every single person will help shape it, by their choices, their preferences, and/or their work.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)