Ivory tower dispatch: A tale of two websites

Across a number of classes this week, two websites have stood out.

To start the week I had this from China Daily.com

Worst headline of the week!

Shoddy! Which thesaurus did they drag that one up from!

This was paydirt for me as I talked to the class (a group of chinese students) about writing headlines, seo. Something that “Shoddy railway project closed down” fails at in every measure.

Worse still the story is really good:

The 74.1-kilometer railway project [Jingyu-Songjianghe Railway project in Changchun], with a total investment of 2.3 billion yuan ($360 million), was recently found to have illegally contracted a fake company and a couple of laymen who barely know anything of building bridges.

Two blokes stroll up and blag $360 million! Come on!

The week ended with a lot of talk about video and a chance for me to roll out my favourite example of the use of online video

Visceral video at its best

It’s an old story but for me it perfectly illustrates the way that video can enhance a story.  This is clip video at its finest – the text tells the story and the video shows you the visceral experience. It enhances the story and works with the text in a combination of media that’s unique to the web.

When I play this in a class I know that one minute in I will get a reaction, a big ooooh that underlines what video is great at. Watch and see what I mean.

Ivory tower dispatch: RSS is like twitter.

Like others in J-school I’m getting to know new classes, spending a bit of time talking about the ‘gathering’ part of journalism and how digital tools can help. So yesterday I bullied my class of postgrads through, among other things, RSS and Google reader.

When I raised the topic, one of the class commented that “it’s just like twitter”

I initially disagreed, talking about the differences of simply gathering, organising and filtering content and actually interacting with people.  But I’ve had a little time to reflect and, do you know, I don’t think that’s a bad way to think about RSS at all.

Twitter is about building a network of people who you can engage with and (positively) use. A network that is big enough not only to give what you want but also what you thought you didn’t need. The serendipity of twitter is one of its charms.

RSS is a lot like that but with websites and not people. The bigger your ‘network’ of websites, the more chance you’ll find something of interest.

For journalists a lot of the motivations for using the tool are the same: network building; time managment etc.

Points of reference

When I introduced Reader, a few people in the room had heard of it (and used it); Most had not. That’s always a surprise to me, but not a criticism of the students. The early days of new classes are always an interesting reality check for me. My world (geeky and riven through with online as it is) is not always the real world! So it’s nice when something gives you pause to reflect.

It made me think a little more about points of reference. I’ve worked through a chronology of this stuff. Started using Reader before twitter and felt the transition in passive to active engagement as the web has developed. That makes sense to me. But a lot of people in the room have come the other way. Facebook and twitter are their point of entry and reference.

Maybe that shows that digital/online journalism is really maturing now (or maybe just my view). Like many other things it’s now as important to look back at how this stuff has developed as it is simply to use it. Even if that ‘history’ is only five or six years young!

Update Kate, the one who suggested RSS is like twitter, reminded me that I should quote my sources.

@ Aren't you supposed to attribute quotations? ;) *cough* itwasme *cough*
@Kate_S_Mercer
Katie Siobhán Mercer

Ivory tower dispatch: It’s all about the process

A stroke of luck at ivory tower land this week as Graham Holliday (with Dave Heywood from the BBC college of journalism) came up to talk to the students about how he fits digital in to what he does.

If you don’y know Graham (@noodlepie) then I can recommend checking out his work. He’s based in Kigali, Rwanda where he works as a foreign correspondent/photographer/trainer and publishes the KigaliWire

What make Graham such a great example is the way he integrates digital in to what he does. It isn’t because he is a geek or because he has a ‘business model’ for kigaliwire. It’s because it just makes it easier to do his job and it helps build his brand.   You can get an insight in to that from the Kigali Back wire

It couldn’t come at a better time for me as most of my contact with students this week has been about process.

Anything but process journalism

After last weeks conclusion that the basic journalism process was not good enough for the new digital landscape, I talked to the second year students about models that might.  Under the broad idea of models and process journalism I looked at Paul Bradshaw’s model for the 21st century newsroom and Charlie Beckett’s (and a bit of Jeff Jarvis’) take on networked journalism.

I wondered if a distinction could be that Charlie’s take on Networked journalism described ‘why’ we needed to this stuff and Paul’s model effectively described how. A bit simplistic but better, I thought, than the over simplistic catch all of ‘process journalism’ - a phrase so willfully crying out to be misinterpreted it hurts.  And it also meant I could pick-up on other elements of Paul’s model and develop that in to more practical areas.

When brains go rougue.

I also touched on some of the issues thrown up by the changing role of the journalist taking a comment by Charlie on Paul’s model along the lines of ‘doesn’t this make journalists editors’.  It’s clear that being closer to the process, more transparent and also a conduit for social media content, instantly published, racks up the pressures.

I left them with some more keywords to think about:

  • Beatblogging
  • Process Journalism
  • Community Journalism

But Preston isn’t Kigali

The conversation about process continued with the postgraduate and undergraduate newspaper students who found Grahams lecture both interesting and scary in equal measure.  Graham had highlighted a number of platforms he used (pixelpipe, yahoo pipes, tube mogul) to make Kigali wire and other parts of his content distribution (distributed journalism) work.  It elicted a ‘Whoa, tech overload’ response from many and one or two pointed out that it doesn’t really scale to Preston does it (Graham made a similar point).

I agree with that sentiment, up to a point.  We are often presented with great examples of how new media has made for great journalism. Twitter in Iran, collaborative mapping and reporting round the Palestine/Israel even the growth of Data Journalism. But those who ply a more local beat could feel that it’s all a bit too rarefied.

But I made the point that you could look beyond the platforms and see the process he used and that process (along with the concepts at the heart of all the high-profile examples) was scaleable.

In the end it was a great motivation to look at RSS and some of the other great sites out there that could be included in a journalism process, regardless of where you where. Last week they found out what beats (topics) and patches (geography) they were going to cover this year. So I left them thinking about Beatblogging and, I hope, how they could bring a little Holliday in to how they did it.

Accountability Vs Transparency

All of this marks a bit of a turning point in what I teach from the contextual to the more immediately practical. Next week, for example it’s all about audio. But a guest lecture slot in the Journalism Issues module gave me the chance to consider much broader contexts. But networked journalism wasn’t far behind.

The title I was given was the converged newsroom but I didn’t want to go over the ground I had done with the students in other modules. So I picked a few issues, ideas and themes that I thought had been driven by convergence but would directly impact on the students.

I picked

  • Paying for journalism
  • Hyperlocal
  • Data Journalism
  • Distributed(networked) journalism

Paying for journalism inevitably meant talking about paywalls which led to talking about the changes to media ownership regulation suggested by Jeremy Hunt as part of the local TV agenda. That led to Hyperlocal which in turn led to devolved government. That led to the accountability (we need local TV to enable people to hold those in power accountable) and so to transparency and data.

It struck me that the sudden boom in government data marks a move to use transparency as accountability. In that respect, if you think data journalism is not important then you are wrong. If you want to hold them accountable (as all journalists should) and data is all you have, then you better know how to work with it.

It needs to be part of your process.

Old and new

All of which highlights the challenge in what I do. Traditional journalism practice comes with a set process. But what if the world you are supposed to be reporting on changes around you?  We can’t say that good journalism will always be good journalism (and in that the way we do it is also ‘good’) because the world and those we hold accountable has changed. If journalism, and the process of it, doesn’t change then it isn’t fit for purpose.

Hopefully in Graham the students saw how it can work.

Ivory tower dispatch: Nothing is simple anymore

I’m going to try and share a little of what I do each week with the students and now that teaching has settled in a little bit after freshers it seemed a good time to start.

This week I wanted to get all the students thinking about some of the issues that contribute to the ‘changing media landscape’ that we have to function in as journalists.

Process in to content

For my second year, Digital Newsroom students I picked on process.

The lecture was really about how the process has changed because of digital. So I took a very basic view of the process – find, research and report – and looked at where in the process digital had made an impact. Here are the slides from my lecture (a bit cryptic without notes I know – come to the lectures!)

I started by saying that the reporting part was where the real medium specific stuff really made itself known (the mechanics of output for a particular platform). Given that we are platform agnostic, this was not where we wanted to be.  Maybe the first parts where more generic? More about broad journalism.

In truth, the process is no longer that discreet. In a multi-platform world we can’t simply focus on one ‘point of delivery’ when the point of delivery is changing all the time. By rights we are (and should be) generating content all the time; what Robin Hamman called turning process in to content. (I’ve written on that issue before.)

But in stumbling along to that conclusion we looked at how digital allows us to inject input from ‘communities’ in to the early parts of our process. We also started to explore the pros and cons of that involvement – legal, ethical and practical.

As a conclusion and starting point for more discussion later on, I picked out three ‘keywords’ that I wanted them to think about.

  • Community
  • Social media
  • Crowdsourcing

All of which, in some form, have contributed to the changing media landscape in which we practice, regardless of medium.

Where chips go, the nation follows.

I didn’t see the thirds year print students this week as they were putting together their first newspaper (1st. week back. No hanging around). But the time I spent with our post-graduate newspaper students looked at similar issues to the second years.

I started with a little debate. I split the group in to two. One side took the position “newspapers will die in five years”. With the other side getting “newspapers will survive the next five years”. As you can imagine interesting debates ensued. Including the position that newspapers weren’t even used to wrap chips in anymore(and the wonderful statement that headed this section), countered of course by ‘you can’t wrap your chips in an ipad’.

It was great to see that the range of debate broadly mirrored the industry concerns(or you may see it as a sad reflection of the echo chamber!) and that the students took a admirable middle ground. Passionate but realistic.

For them, the list of things to ponder was longer but similar:

  • Community
  • Multi-platform
  • Multimedia
  • Hyperlocal
  • Data Journalism

I also included Profile/engagement on the list but that became a broader discussion of brand and identity.  Something that began to touch on the deeper issues of professionalism and ethics.

Nothing is simple

If this week could be summed up in a nutshell it would be “nothing is simple anymore”. We don’t just simply write for newspapers ( or make TV/radio etc) – we have an eye on multiplatform.  It’s not as simple as just talking to the community anymore – we interact. Everything is made more complex by technology and the influx of digital. Some of it is in our control. Some of it isn’t.

What we can’t avoid is that some of that pressure lands on the journalist, right from the point they engage with a story,  regardless of where it ultimately ends up. It may not be your employer who brings that pressure to bear. It may be the audience…

PS. Just in case you thought that we do nothing practical they also started (or, in the case of the second years restarted) blogs (platform up to them) and google reader.  The postgrads got their beats and patches to play with and got to explore their hyperlocal/patch site.

Image from tim_ellis on Flickr

Enhanced by Zemanta