Category Archives: academic

Digital job hunting

Posted on by
3

Last week I gave a short lecture to broadcast (and a smattering of magazine) students about using the web to help find a job.

I tried to sum the whole thing up in a pithy slide:

It was really about fitting digital in to an already well established pattern for job hunting – traditional ad’s with a good slice of what and who you know.

That’s why I started with a list of job sites offering a digital way of doing that long slog of working through the job ad’s.  No surprise there then.

But I made the point that looking for work in a converged world mean’t a bit of a change of perspective.

Even though you may come from a broadcast tradition and your target job may be in a traditional environment (radio newsroom for example) the market is increasingly varied. (as my highly technical diagram shows) Your skills carry across boundaries in a converging world. You could end up as a radio producer at a newspaper working on their podcasts or working for an online only publication working on video.

Increasingly that converged mindset is what you have to cultivate to get work. But I think it’s also  the mindset to apply for job hunting. Don’t limit yourself to one sector. Instead of starting in one of the circles, position yourself in the middle and aim at all of them. You never know what might crop up. So my tip around searching for jobs also included searching for jobs.

By searching for something like radio OR broadcast jobs UK you get a rich and broad pot that you can then start to refine and filter. To develop your searches, think laterally. Add phrases that are specific to your area of interest or that would be unique to a job : radio OR broadcast ~job +salary +enps uk.

Remember the aim here is not to get Google to simply churn out job ads; the jobs sites will do that. It’s also to introduce an element of serendipity in to the mix that will richen your understanding of the market.

Of course the introduction of a broader range of sites means more content to wade through so you’ll also need to consider ways to manage the flow. Simple things like setting up a Google Alert based on the search terms you enter can help. But you may also want to get your RSS reader working for you to pull all your job related feeds in to one place that you can search and filter.

If a speculative google search throws up an interesting company (who don’t have jobs but you might want to keep an eye on) then search for an RSS feed to subscribe to. Then when a job comes up you know what they have been up to.

When the orginal slides went up in a post on  journalism.co.uk, John Thompson pointed out a way to get custom RSS feeds based on custom searches.

In the top left-hand column on most of the pages on Journalism.co.uk, you will see a panel headed “Job of the week”. About half-way down there is a dropdown menu that allows you to search by job type. For this example, select “editorial assistants and trainees” and click “go”.

On the subsequent search results page, you will see at the top of the central column an advanced search form. This allows you to make a more detailed search based on sectors, categories, salary and location. You will also see an option under format to “return search results as RSS feed”. Select that and also tick “editorial assistants and trainees” under the “categories” section.

Click the search button and, voila, you will be presented with a customised RSS feed containing only editorial assistant and trainee vacancies.

Josh Halliday got in touch via twitter so say he has put together a combined RSS feed of popular job sites that you can subscribe to. (thanks Josh)

I’ve put together an RSS bundle of just five of the UK’s most comprehensive media jobs listings sites: Gorkana, Guardian Jobs, Journalism.co.uk Jobs, Hold The Front Page and the Editorial Jobs Twitter feed (it’s RSS is borked).

And don’t forget that there are other ‘oldschool’ ways. Sign up for email newsletters like the Gorkana alert

The Shmoozing bit.
In the media people will often tell you that it’s about who you know rather than what. So whilst the broad searching will tell you what jobs are available and give a broad view of what’s going on we need to get next to some real people.

At this point it’s worth stressing that this is not about using digital to replace the process. You still need to get out there and meet people. But we can build our own networks online that help us connect and experience the churn or views and news from the industry. It could be eavesdropping on the latest gossip to build up ‘intelligence’ or even using the community to help you get a job.

But if it’s about who you know, how do we know who to connect with?

This is where social networking sites like Twitter come in to their own. They offer an easy way to find and connect with people in your community. Take a look at MediaUK’s twitter page (@mediauk). Obviously a popular follow and the kind of thing that a lot of people in the industry would look at. Now we could go through the list of people that follow and are followed by @mediauk to find useful people; use their contacts if you like. But notice their lists

Mediauk's twitter lists

They are nicely split in to sections and make following a glut of people in your area easy. If you find someone on the list who really resonates with you or fits right in to your area then look at their lists (if they have them) and build your network.

The same logic (if not the same mechanics) work for other social networking sites. Take a look at LinkedIn or even Facebook. Connect with one person or join a Facebook group and you’ll open yourself up to more connections.

Of course, the key to success in social networks is to be an active part; Share, listen, help, participate. All of these things will build your profile. And profile is important as it doesn’t just build your recognition within the community (the most valuable part) but it also makes you more visible online.

The lists from mediaUK are actually generated from user submissions – you can go to their site and add yourself. That’s an easy way to be pro-active about building visibility. For some this might fall in to the ‘rampant self promotion’ section but it’s a way of getting your name out there.

That’s why I think a blog is still a valuable tool in your job searching kit.

Many people are leaving blogs behind in favour of the more dynamic ‘statusphere’ of twitter and social networks. But a blog offers something a little more stable, a more permanent place for you online. It offers you a chance to reinforce and expand your online identity. (I will always look at the link that people put in their twitter profile to get more information about a person.) To start with you could use it simply as a static CV/Portfolio site that you can point people to when applying for jobs. But it could soon expand to offer more. More active posting about your experiences and interests attract audience.

The most popular blogs within the journalism community tend to be the ones that share experiences – Think about Josh sharing that list of RSS feeds. It’s journalists trying things and showing their working out. Thats valuable to the community and people remember you for that (you’re playing an active role). That’s one of the reasons I linked to Adam Westbrook in the presentation. Like Josh, he’s a great example of someone who plays an active part in the community.

You could ask ‘why a blog and not a static website?’ My first response is that blogging is one of those things that you should have experience of in a converged world (back to my point earlier). But there are some, more practical reasons.

There are lots of great website builders out there (I’d add Jimdo to that list ), but blogs offer a lot of under the bonnet stuff that helps promote your stuff and make it easy to share. Built in notification of search engines and automatic RSS feeds are just two of the things that will help spread yourself around the web. They may be the thing that gets you popping up in a search engine when a prospective employer searches your name and it will link them to something that sells you appropriately.

Here’s a quick cheat sheet telling you how you can tweak a wordpress.com blog to start showing static pages rather than the more dynamic posts. You can change it later on when you are ready to go down the more dynamic posting route.

Given that this presentation was to broadcast students I also looked at the problems associated with multimedia on free sites and blogs. I’ve listed a number of third party hosts that you can try to get round some of those restrictions. Using a third party site also has the benefit of getting your work out there on another platform to another audience.

So, there it is. Use the web to sign up to job sites but don’t stop there. Use it to broaden your horizons, think multiplatform in where you look. Be part of and visible in the community and your profile will grow and that can only be a good thing.

I hope it made sense and if you have any questions then drop me a line.

Enhanced by Zemanta

No such thing as free money to save the local press

Posted on by
2

As I was leafing through the Guardian on Saturday morning I came across an article with the rather alarming headline

Google news tax could boost local papers, report says

Google and other websites that carry news they do not produce should be taxed and the money generated used to prop up local newspapers, says a report which warns control of the media is concentrated in too few hands.

I tweeted it and got a number of interesting replies:

The report comes from the Carnegie trust UK’s commission on Making Good Society. It does indeed set out a suggestion for Industry levies citing Institute for Public Policy Research research that a 1% levy on pay TV providers of 1% “bring in around £70m a year”

A similar fee imposed on the country’s five mobile operators could generate £208m a year. Making Google meet its full tax liability in Britain would boost the pot by a further £100m.‘ The same IPPR report argues that ‘such sums could save many local newspapers and web sites from closing down, could stop the destruction of local and regional news on ITV and could help new media start-ups to plug these gaping holes in public service provision – all without the taxpayer having to stump up any more cash and without having to raid the licence fee.’

But the report also makes it clear that the money would come with something of price

Levies on the use of aggregated material have the potential to generate significant revenue to support the production of new public service and local content, involving civil society associations. If this form of funding were to be explored, changes in regulation would be needed to ensure that revenues go to original news producers and not just to those who present and disseminate material. Original news reporting needs to be supported so that it is financially viable; this could require charging those who are not authorised to use and distribute this material.

Not quite free money from a google tax.

The whole report makes for an interesting read (I mean genuinely interesting not that other academic definition of interesting)

It’s pretty wide ranging but it singles out “democratising media ownership and content as one of it’s four main areas where “a stronger civil society could make the most difference”

A whole chapter (chapter 3) is devoted to trying to understand the pressures on and drivers of news production and the impact that has. They are clear that technology plays a key part citing radical cultural shifts associated with pervasive technology and the rise of ‘digital natives;’ as an uncertain driver of change. But the discussion is a bit more broad ranging:

…[D]espite the proliferation of online platforms, more of the news we receive is recycled ‘churnalism’ and aggregated content. Trends of concentration in media ownership and increased pressure of time and resources have narrowed the sources from which original news derives. Moreover, the centralisation of news production and neglect of local issues has particular repercussions for access to information across the UK and Ireland, especially in the devolved nations.

And it’s clear where the problem is:

…the central issue affecting traditional news providers is not the decline of audiences or interest in news, but the collapse of the existing business model jeopardising the democratic role of journalism. According to the National Union of Journalists: ‘The media industry is essentially profitable but the business model is killing quality journalism.’

Media concentration.
When I first read the Guardian article I bristled at the idea of a google tax of newspapers. Why? Because we would essentially be propping up commercial organsiations who still work at a profit. It would be akin to a bail out. So I found myself drawn to the areas of ownership and centralization in particular. The report is pretty robust here.

The challenge of creating original content and the diminishing number of newspapers is further compounded by the concentration of media ownership in relatively few hands…..with four dominant publishers controlling 70% of the market share across the UK

That concentration of ownership and the influence it exerts is cited as a “key obstacle to transparent policy-making which incorporates a sustainable role for civil society associations” Which comes from the ‘continuing and intimate relationship between key corporate interests and policy-makers; a relationship whose bonds are rarely exposed to the public’

Their suggestion seems to be that the Scott Trust/Guardian model is more likely to serve the development of a pluralist media landscape than a purely commercial one. But it sounds a note of caution

While independent funds directly supporting journalism can come with strings attached and endowments are not immune from economic pressures, philanthropic funding can help preserve journalistic independence and secure guarantees on public service content.

General suggestions.
The big ticket suggestions like tax breaks and levies are balanced by some more specific suggestions that form the main discussion of the chapter.

  • Growing local and community news media.
  • Protecting the free, open and democratic nature of the internet.
  • Strengthening the transparency and accountability of news content production.
  • Enhancing the governance of the media.
  • Protecting the BBC.
  • Redirecting revenue flows to promote diversity and integrity.

Their ideas for strengthening transparency include the suggestion of a Kite mark that shows no dis or mis-information. Good luck with that one.

But back to funding, the last three points are interesting in themselves.

When they talk about enhancing the governance of the media they say that”

“All news organisations in receipt of public funding should actively engage with the public and with civil society associations, through their governing bodies as well as through their daily practice.”

Which could only really mean the BBC right? But in developing the suggestion of redirecting the revenue flow they:

…want to see new funding models explored: for example, tax concessions, industry levies or the direction of proportions of advertising spend into news content creation by civil society associations, or into local multimedia websites.

The price of public money.
My reading of the report was that nothing comes for free. In an earlier chapter the financial sector comes in for a real battering. But though the media orgs are more delicately handled the implicit message is still the same. All the money that could come from tax breaks, funding and other sources comes at a cost. That cost is de-centralisation, openness, stronger regulation and in transparency (a phrase that seems to disappear mid report to be replaced by integrity)

Would be nice but I can’t see it happening.

The full report is available here.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Students don’t read newspapers Shock!

Posted on by
8
Sherlock Holmes in "The Red-Headed League.
Jim’s fellow students always took the piss out of him when he read the daily mail (Image via Wikipedia)

Given that this is a post about newspapers I suppose that could have been “students slammed for not reading” or “students blast quality of newspapers”.

Still, news reaches me that Students aren’t reading newspapers. According to Australian research:

90 per cent of students do not like reading the newspaper, preferring to source news from commercial television or online media.

The report is familiar reading which unfortunate falls foul of a little gratuitous referencing of twitter. But, as is increasingly common, the comments just as interesting and pretty much round-up the relative positions in the debate. They go something like: (my response in italics)

  • Students are lazy or thick – maybe some are. But why does that make them any different from every other walk of life.
  • Newspapers are crap, why would they read them - there is some truth in this.
  • Newspapers are slow; behind the news - but that’s what makes the content different and the best ones know that and have changed their output
  • Newspapers are the only thing that give you what you need not what you want – this view is pompous and self righteous.
  • Students read lots but understand little – ditto.
  • Reading  a newspaper is a democratic responsibility – If you believe that then spend your time fighting the way most media outlets ignore this vital role.
  • Students see the future and have left the sinking ship before newspapers die – maybe they have or maybe they just don’t care. Either way, it’s  the media’s job to persuade them that they are wrong and make them care. It’s not my job to make them buy your product.

All points that will be hotly debated regardless of my view.  But there are two other aspects of this debate that frustrate me.

The first is a personal tick of mine. When I read…

“The future of printed newspapers is looking grim as there is an evident shift towards digital journalism.”

…I bristle.

For me digital journalism is not separate from newspaper journalism.  For me digital journalism is using digital skills to develop stories and content for any platform.  Not a medium in itself. But that’s just me.

The other is the idea that students should read newspapers to get the news. Forgetting the debate about the amount of news in newspapers, that misses the big, elephant in the room sized, point. Journalism students should read newspapers because they are students of journalism.

As one commentator (a journalism student as it happens) said

Journalism students should engage in all media forms including radio, tv, print and online. That way, you’re at an advantage – learning different ways and being able to differentiate various styles of writing.

A comment that echoes an earlier commentator

I think it is poor form for students who ‘study’ the media to disregard entire media formats and opt for banal, entertainment driven commercial television news as an alternative

The last part is a value judgement (which kind of ironic given their point) but you get the idea.

As a student of journalism, don’t read newspapers just for the news. Since when has news been a newspaper story anyway.   You read a newspaper because it is part of the landscape you will be working in. You are not just a consumer of news anymore.

If you are studying journalism, seek it out in all it’s forms, good or bad, and learn from it.

Let’s, for one second, imagine newspapers will die. Wouldn’t it be great to have an understanding of how they died so you don’t make the same mistakes?

Enhanced by Zemanta

Free training and a paid work placement

Posted on by
2

meld

How’s about that for an offer?

As part of their Meld initiative we are working on a project called InFuze. It is offering freelance journalists and content producers looking to update their skills for a multiplatform world a FREE six week course.

InFUZE is looking for talented professional Journalists wanting to learn how to produce cutting edge content for TV, radio, online and mobile. The course features input from top creative and technical talent from the industry as well as a 4 week paid placement in a digital newsroom.

The 6 week programme developed by the BBC and UCLan’s School of Journalism, Media and Communication Meld team starts on March the 23rd.

The course is split in to three parts. An intensive week of preparation including input from industry to help get you ready for part two.

Part two is a 4 week placement within industry to try out your ideas. You won’t be working for free – each placement is supported by a bursary.

Part three sees you coming back for another week of debriefing, development and support.

All we want in return are your ideas and your enthusiasm.

So if you fancy a FREE six week course with a paid work placement then you can get more detail and apply online at the meld website.

Feel free to drop me a comment if you have any questions or you can get in touch via twitter at @digidickinson

Go on. You know you want to.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Ignoring icebergs: The NCTJ and sinking ships.

Posted on by
6
It might be an iceberg but it's a minor in a court case so we ignore it.

It might be an iceberg but it's a minor in a court case so we ignore it.(picture from Ludovic Hirlimann on Flickr )

I’ve spent the day in the pleasent company of Journalists at the Middlesborough Gazette (some where from Newscastle) and I’m wondering what happened whilst I was training.

Did Hold the Front Page turn in the wayback machine.

Checking my email some of my work colleagues had been kicking around the HTFP story about an increase in applications to journalism degrees, despite the problems in the industry.

The story was one of my interesting links yesterday and I commented

I’m surprised by this or maybe students have got their head around what the industry can’t (and one or two of the comments on this piece make reinforce that idea) that newspapers/TV/Radio and journalism are not the same thing

The idea being that journalism was an intresting and valid thing to study. And, given the right course, would give you skills to do journalism rather than work for a newspaper or TV station.

So imagine my surprise when I read the following quote on another HTFP story today

Eastern Daily Press editor Paul Durrant told students that he “wasn’t bothered” about them having a degree.

Speaking at the second annual student council meeting, he added: “I’m bothered about NCTJ qualifications – I’m bothered about vocational training. I’m looking for maturity, passion and confidence.

“In terms of currency in the industry, I need to know someone’s got 100wpm shorthand, that they know what a Section 39 is.”

This was said at a meeting organised by the NCTJ where students could ‘meet the council’

I am genuinely amazed at the singular blindness a statement like this suggests to the broader problems in the industry.

Durrant may be bothered by these things. That’s his right as an editor. You could also argue they are important – I’m genuinely agnostic about this kind of thing now. But what else can he offer to anyone who takes him at his word?

As a senior journalist in the newspaper industry what security can he offer in return to a future journalist who is ‘bothered’ about staying in the industry?

Sometimes I wonder if the NCTJ has been running a secret training course – Pre-Entry newspaper editor, becoming captain of the titanic in 20 weeks.

Update: Over at Journalism.co.uk Dave Lee is asking for opinion on this whole debate as part of their Tomorrow’s News, Tomorrow’s Journalist section.

Related articles by Zemanta
Enhanced by Zemanta

If you saw you on facebook would you give you a job?

Posted on by
3
Superman, Clarke Kent or drunk traffic cone molester - what does your facebook profile

Superman, Clarke Kent or drunk traffic cone molester - what does your facebook profile. Picture by shaun wong (flickr)

Okay, that has to be the worst English I have written (even by my standards) but think about it.

This post may appear more relevent to the students who occasionally look at my blog or who will find their way to this post via Twitter. In fact it was a chat with some first-year students that prompted the post and this link to a guide for setting your profile on Facebook, which I thought would be useful. But I think there is a broader issue.

My point to them was that their Facebook profiles where often not the best advert for them. That wasn’t a reflection on them at all. Just that some people don’t use Facebook as a social network. They use it as a way to ‘use’ those social networks and the information they generate. That could be a prospective employer or, to be honest, a journalist stacking up a story.

One student said they planned to delete their profile before they began applying for jobs, whilst others claimed that their profiles where already secure. But many were unaware that Google can search Facebook (and does a pretty good job of it) and that the privacy settings could be tweaked to the level they could.  This is before you get in to a discussion about whether you really can delete anything on the web.

But the point, and here’s the wider issue, was not the appropriateness of the profile. It was  that Facebook is a public facing service and as someone who plans to be in the public eye as a journalist, you should exercise some control over your professional image online just as you would offline.

Work/life balance.

The idea of public/private persona is not just limited to Facebook. Dilyan Damyanov asks a similar question in his post “Should professionals have separate work accounts on Twitter?” which replays a twitter debate about the much mentioned Twitter outburst by David George-Cosh. Like Dilyan, I’m looking forward to Mark Comerford’s take on this.

Update: Just caught up with Mathew Ingram’s take on this

My first years are setting out on the what I call the change from “poacher to gamekeeper”. They know how to take what they want from the web as consumers but now they are working to another standard (I’ll avoid the word ethic there).  Alf Hermida’s recent article underlines why this is important.

But they are not alone. There are hundreds of journalists moving online and whilst we explore this new media (or whatever we end up calling it) we all need to think  about what trail we leave.

Related articles by Zemanta
Enhanced by Zemanta

A Process and content checklist

Posted on by
10

I’ve been chatting with my undergraduate students about their experience with digital whilst on work placement. They went to a mix of magazines, regional newspapers(weekly and daily) and some to websites. As you can imagine their experience was a mixed bag from no digital at all to shooting video for the website.

When I asked those who had little or nothing to do with the web why, I got a range of answers. Some publications simply did not have a website and those that did saw it as secondary to the main task of putting out the paper. One of the students summed up the motivation for this when they quoted an editor who had told him (and I’m paraphrasing here)

“You can’t put the paper out with any gaps in it but you can put the website out with stuff missing”

It may surprise you to hear that I have a lot of sympathy with that view  – if nothing else I’m pragmatic. After all the editor is right. The paper is a pre-set framework with stuff to put in. Of course the web would come second. But we all know that it can and has to change.

Integrating the web in to the journalism process

Key to that change is the idea that the process of generating content has to consider the web platform from the start of the reporting process not just as an afterthought. As Paul Bradshaw recently blogged “Newsgathering IS production IS distribution”

It’s a concept that is reflected in the development of what I do at the university.

In the ten years that I’ve been teaching this stuff I’ve found myself stepping further and further away from the point of publication (teaching html, dreamweaver etc) and closer to the start of the journalistic process.  Now I’m telling people about how to integrate twitter and facebook in to their journalistic process. By thinking digital from the start  you can begin to create content for the newspaper AND for the web. Not one after the other.  It’s a convergence of effort rather than a duplication. What Robin Hamman called turning process in to content.

I had that in my mind when I was talking to another group of students about their assignments and encouraging them to consider a kind of check list, based on the tried and tested 5 W’s,  when they where starting off on a story.

  • Who - who are the key players in the story and do I have (or need to get)
     - a picture
     - a link to a bio or other information about them
  • What - what’s the issue? Do I have a link to a backgrounder or other articles that fill out the context of the story
  • When – make a note of times and dates of key events in your story. More than 5 or 6 of these may mean that your story would suit a timeline online.
  • Where – note locations, postcodes if you can, mentioned in the story. These may be useful for a map
  • Why - why is this important to your audience. Do you need to look across forums and communities to see what the reaction is like.

I also noted that you could, perhaps, throw a How in there as in “how did this happen”. This could be a mixture of the what and when and may help define and create a timeline or infographic.

Process and content checklist

I want to explore the best way to ingrain that way of thinking in the students and one way I’m going to try is with a checklist I created (pdf)

The idea is that this check list is filled out as the story develops and handed to the digital editor as the story nears completion

Here is an idea of how it might work – A local builder has asked for planning permission to build a slaughterhouse and rendering plant in an area that, local residents say, is too close to a school.

An example of a completed form
An example of a completed form

The list, generated as the story develops, to include images of the main players (the minimum you would want for a webpage). It also points to websites that could be included as related links. These will have been gathered as the journalist researched the story. Postcodes and a chronology of events where appropriate fill out the detail and indicate whether maps or timeline would work.

This may seem a little too systematic for some but I’d be interested in what you think of the idea as an aide memoir to kick start more online thinking earlier in the reporting process.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Turning dog poo in to stories

Posted on by
10

I’ve been spending a lot of time doing prep for teaching and training that I’m doing at the moment. So expect the slow appearance of a backlog of posts on video and other related issues. But I thought I would share something that has been in my radar for a few days.

I’ve been doing a lot of talking (shocking for me I know) about using the web for research – journalism toolbox stuff. And one of the things I have been stressing is that the web will very rarely just ‘give’ you a story. It will give you lots of data and information but the story is in the way you, as the journalist, put the things together. The phrase that I heard last week that best summed that up journalists are sense makers. Phil Trippenbach has a nice post on this so I won’t labour the point.

But whilst I was browsing for resources and examples to show my students and delegates I came across a site that made me wonder if I had to re-think that position – fixmystreet.co.uk

Fixmystreet.co.uk is a site by the fantastic Mysociety group who specialize in socially aware, achingly web2.0 sites. Top stuff on a number of levels and their other sites are worth a visit. Anyway, here is how they describe fixmystreet:

A site where people can report, view, or discuss local problems like graffiti, fly tipping, broken paving slabs, or street lighting.

Nearly 25,000 problems have now been reported across the UK, with our users following up many thousands with updates, news and notifications that problems have been fixed

Here’s an example of an ongoing problem with litter.

Fixmystreet.co.uk - tracking local problems

Fixmystreet.co.uk - tracking local problems

You can also sign up for an RSS feed or email alerts for a location. Told you it was brilliant.

So I’m showing my students the site today as we discussed ways that you can get a handle on a patch. They enjoyed it, not least because it offers, what must be, the most accurate geographic mapping of poo that I have yet to see on the web. With pictures! Anything scatological is a hit with students it seem.

I made the point that it shouldn’t replace physically getting out on the patch but it could provide some insight and a conversation opener when wandering around. But it wouldn’t throw up a story. Then we came across this entry.

Is this just about dog poo?

Is this just about dog poo?

Take a look and ask yourself if there is a story in that or not and if it’s a story about dog poo.

Locating the meaning

In terms of the way you would work a beat to get a story to pitch to an editor this site serves up a hell of a lot in just a few lines of comment. Perhaps it’s the fact that the story is located that adds the context you need. Maybe it did take my eyes on the story to make the connection. But one thing is for sure, fixmystreet proves that locally focused geo-mashups work.

So if the embryonic geotagging of your content or the occasional attempts at mapping this kind of thing have fallen of the radar or been dismissed as gimmicks, maybe it’s worth looking again.

Take more of a healthy interest in your audiences poo.

UPDATE:Because I am that plugged in at the moment I didn’t see this great interview with one of My society’s developers Francis Irving on Journalism.co.uk/ (thanks the Alex Lockward for the nudge)