More publications should do this sort of thing. (See also: every issue of Plan B magazine in a handy torrent.)
More publications should do this sort of thing. (See also: every issue of Plan B magazine in a handy torrent.)
Gonzo was great when it emerged because there was nothing else like it, though now that there is we have no need for it, at least for its own sake. But the essence of gonzo -- the risk-taking, the bucking of the rules -- is missing, especially in the fields this piece is concerned with, where a bit of adventure would go a long way. That essense is the reason why I read Digitiser religiously in the '90s, even though I wasn't a gamer.
As previously noted here. Looks like it went live on Friday. They slipped that one out unannounced, didn't they? Looks good so far; I may have further thoughts on it later.
Considering the sheer number of people I've seen around Dublin reading the Irish Daily Mail -- the filthy rag that it is -- I'm sure they'll make the money back soon enough.
I like it, I like it a lot. I can't see it displacing freesheets anytime soon, but it's a good start.
Newspaper design consultant trawls Newsvine and the web for the best US media-related stories.
All newspapers should have something like this [c/o kottke.org].
On the so-called death of the art of headline writing, the news of which has been greatly exaggerated. I think we will be seeing more dual headlines, to compensate for the linguistic formality of search engine algorithms, but that's as bad as it's going to get -- as if it isn't bad enough already [c/o SimonWaldman.net].
A bit too dense for a quick read, but there's some excellent points raised.
Seems like a bit of a waste of time to me, with all the tired talk of 'leveraging' this and 'monetising' that. The most important thing I can glean from it all is that the old media vanguard seems determined to maintain their status quo and bend the web to their own will, completely oblivious to the fact that they're hopelessly transparent in their motivations and machinations, and that the web and its users are already leaving them behind. The quality (re: podcasting, especially) might not be there yet, but at this stage it's the freedom that's more important. (See also: Tom Coates expands upon and clarifies his comments re: social media, which gives some more context to the argument.)
The Guardian's new podcasting service. And they've gone all out, too. Talk about convergence...
A journalist completely missing the point of blogging? Never! But in all seriousness, Poirier is anyway wrong in her definition of journalism. It's neither a hobby nor a profession: it's a practise [c/o Bobbie Johnson].
They deserve it.
There's no need to shout; some of us are already looking. Though it'll be easier in the future, when the web will be taken more seriously.
An exhaustive report covering the state of journalism in America, but much of it would apply to most Western nations [c/o kottke.org].
I think Emmet overstates the significance of the rioting just a tad, but his point is valid. In events as big as this the media just doesn't have the access that ordinary people on the street do. And now that these ordinary people are beginning to use the tools at their disposal we are seeing the picture broaden, even if only a little.
That could be me one day, that could [c/o languagehat].
This is great. But it brings up a point: if the web is supposed to be a library, information like that found in newspaper archives should really be free. It's only a matter of time, I guess, but things like this would be better operated as public services, not merely as profit-making businesses. Governments take note [c/o ResearchBuzz].
Mick Fealty's published reply to a typically ignorant commentary on blogging in The Irish Times.
In 2005, tragedy served as a catalyst for a technologically-empowered citizenry to take some measure of control over the media. Small potatoes in the big scheme of things, yes, but nonetheless incredibly significant. What we need to see now, of course, is what the public can do with this newfound influence when there is no major event to react to.
On a glance, it probably only applies to the United States. But I'm filing it here for future reference anyway.
A short but sweet little piece from the NYT peering into the lives of crime scene reporters.
Download PDFs of the first edition for free, while it lasts. First impressions? Very good, but maybe a little overboard with the colour [c/o NewsDesigner.com].
I still haven't posted my thoughts on The Guardian's relaunch in September. Better late than never, eh?
Dan Gillmor rails against "facts without context that suggest something but don't deliver".
I don't quite know what to make of this one. The kid's either incredibly brave or incredibily stupid.
Sure it could have been worse.
"A project that explores the doom-and-gloom agenda of London's Evening Standard headline writers" [c/o del.icio.us/linkmachinego].
Though they've neglected to make a distinction between niche and trade publications, there's some pretty crazy stuff here worth a look.
A downsizing newspaper puts its staff up for auction. What a neat idea! Better get my CV ready...
The irony of a newspaper that's virtually invisible to the web behind its paywall having the gall to criticise the blogosphere hasn't been lost on me. And honestly, does anyone check the dictionary anymore? The correct spelling is 'weblog'. That's one word, people. Can't you stick to your own house style? [Gavin's Blog has thankfully reproduced the article so we don't have to pay to be insulted]
Short and to the point, but much food for thought here.
Seems like it'll be some sort of weblog/del.icio.us/news website hybrid. I'd like to see more.
Out for a walk this morning with the iPod, I was listening to a recent episode of On The Media which just happened to feature a short interview with former war correspondent Richard Gizbert, who was — allegedly — fired by ABC News for his refusal to cover the ongoing conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. Gizbert is no milquetoast; a veteran of warzones in Somalia, Rwanda and Chechnya, he merely decided that he’d done his bit, and chose his family and well being over the story and the danger that comes with it.
It’s ironic how I listened to this programme just hours before The Guardian confimed that its Baghdad correspondent Rory Carroll is missing, presumably kidnapped. (BBC News has some more information.) Aside from being shot in crossfire or caught in a road bombing, it’s the worst case scenario for any warzone journalist; it’s the kind of situation that no doubt prompted Gizbert’s decision.
As a Guardian reader familiar with Carroll’s work (particularly his vivid dispatches from South Africa during his previous posting) there’s a visceral kick to news like this, something only compounded by learning that he’s a fellow Irishman, who worked his way up through the ranks like any other journalist. A decade ago he was likely where myself and my classmates are right now. I can even see one of my collegues following his path someday. I can picture this same thing happening to one of my friends, and it gives me a chill down my spine.
I don’t know Rory Carroll but, in a weird way, I feel like I should. Right now, however, I can’t do much but wish for his safe return and hope he’ll get through this unscathed.
Update 20/10: The Guardian has announced that Rory Carroll was freed and is apparently unharmed. Tomorrow’s paper I’m sure will have more on the story; he’s not the only person connected to the Saddam Hussein trial who’s been kidnapped this week, after all.
An old post from Tom Coates that deserves re-reading.
Good media magazine produced by final year undergrads. And it's free!
There's a PDF of the front page here. Hmm. I don't know. The blue strap masthead seems a bit too close to the relaunched Independent for my linking. And typographically? It was close to perfection anyway; I don't see why they had to go and mess with it. Strikes me as a step backwards on first impression. What do you think?
I’ve been trying to find information — any information — about an alleged suicide attempt at my local DART station this afternoon.
Whether it was a suicide attempt or not (that’s what the staff at Pearse station reportedly relayed to commuters, at least) the incident was serious enough to cause suspension of part of the network on the northside for a significant part of the evening rush hour. (I know this because my mum was caught up in it on leaving work, and had to walk across the city to get a bus home instead.) This might be common on complex metro networks in other cities, but the DART is a one-route service; any major delays are out of the ordinary.
So one would expect to find a report about this on the web this evening, or a ‘breaking news’ headline on one of the newspaper websites. But do you think I can find any? Not at all. RTÉ News, the Irish Independent and The Irish Times are all coming up blank on this story. Not even a one-liner, even though it was briefly mentioned on TV at the 6pm bulletin (which I didn’t catch myself). The most I could find anywhere was a travel alert update on the Irish Rail website that referred to an ‘incident’ having occurred this afternoon at Raheny, but nothing more (the message has since been removed from the site).
It’s perplexing, particularly so when one sees reports of a derailment on the Luas line that occurred many hours later, and involved an empty tram at the end of the line. I don’t see why that’s deserving of recogniton while this isn’t, without getting into accusations of southside/northside snobbery.
I thought the web was supposed to expedite the breaking of news in cases like this, not leave us in the dark. Then again, a major part of what my thesis is about is that the mainstream media are recognised as having shortcomings (in terms of the stories and events they cover, etc.) that can, and should, be addressed by news consumers. The blogosphere acts when the news media are lacking – and in this case, they’re definitely lacking.
And that’s why I’m addressing it here. Pray tell, oh my news, where art thou?
Update 25/8: At last, something — a NIB on page 18 of this morning’s Irish Independent:
> A man in his 30s was killed after he fell in front of a train yesterday.
> The man fell in front of a Drogheda-Dublin commuter train at Raheny at 2:10pm. No Dart trains ran north of Harmonstown for some hours. Trains to Drogheda were delayed.
Still nothing on the web, though, even 20 hours later. My complaint still stands: the internet is supposed to expedite the provision of news, but in this instance our mainstream media are clearly lacking.
It all seems so impatient; always looking forward to the next item before you've even considered the one you're watching. Watching the news shouldn't be like using an iPod. (Douglas Rushkoff has a more detailed critique.)
Sure, if you're lost behind the times, maybe...
A fascinating look at what went on behind the scenes on the web before I first logged on; I didn't catch on to Suck until just before it closed forever.
Because somebody needs to keep an eye on them. I can't even touch the rag myself; their newsprint has cooties.
Treating their readers like equal partners, eh? That's refreshing. But I have to ask, would we be seeing this today if not for the Internet?
A graphical representation of popularity of news stories via Google News. (more info here). Nicely done.
Another link for my thesis.
It just goes to show that words don't often have a clear and precise meaning. Derrida was right, ha!
The Guardian Newsblog also comments. Is it really so hard for the American media to accept that London is a multicultural society?
When you read the nanny's reply, I'm sure you'll agree it's the latter. What's worse is that the New York Times printed that trash, and won't retract it; my confidence in them is waning.
He finds it 'macabre' that the first thing someone does after an explosion is to photograph the scene, but isn't that what photojournalists do for a living? What message does that send: if you're an amateur you're being ghoulish, but if you're getting paid for it you're providing a public service? I understand the point Naughton is trying to make, but really, what precludes someone who doesn't work as a journalist from reporting like one? Where's the line that separates a freelancer from a 'lay' person? It's a fair question.