re:”I’d love to see a way reporters can work with ordinary folks to improve their understanding of the communities they cover. I just haven’t seen a model that has worked. Steve Outing recently reported on his effort, and the results were disappointing. What gets in the way of developing such an effort, in part, is the constant carping about the sins of the “MSM.” We need trained, professional, journalists. And we need to input from people who live in the communities they cover. No argument there, from me at least. The question is how best to do it.”
Henry,
Well, I suppose we would “need” all sort of things if we could just get them for free:)… Why would “ordinary people” spend their time and volunteer their knowledge etc. to help out the journalists so… the latter can continue to make money at it? This is what the vast majority of these projects are trying to do: either upfront — and those at least have a modicum of honesty - or, much more often, as an undisclosed ultimate goal.
Delia
P.S. I doubt anybody’s going to come up with a for-profit model that will work for the long run. And even if it did happen, such models would always be vulnerable to equivalent non-profit models that would use the profits to advance the mission and would thus treat the contributing “ordinary people” that make these kind of projects work with the respect they deserve. D.
MORE:
re: “…But I cannot imagine he lives in the present-day world when he claimed in the speech: “Most of the blog world does not even attempt to report. It recycles. It riffs on the news. That’s not bad. It’s just not enough. Not nearly enough.”
This is simply not true going forward, and he should have done some reporting on the subject to find out. There is an ever-increasing number of online outlets who are doing most excellent online reporting.” (Kara Swisher)
Henry,
I thought you had some valid criticism in this regard: “Oddly, because most of them are intelligent people, they don’t seem to notice the source of many of the stories they read online — the so-called MSM.”
As far as I see it, Kara just has an optimistic view of the future… which is fine, as long as she acknowledges it… — “an ever increasing number”? –> even if true and she doesn’t back up her claim although she charges Keller with the same “crime”, you need a strong dose of optimism to get from that to her conclusion:” this is *simply not true* going forward” [my emphasis].
Delia
P.S. re: “Not enough, of course, never enough, but it is a clear trend in almost every category.” –> this claim by Kara definitely needs shown research to be taken seriously. D.
EVEN MORE:
"re: “At a certain point surely we just have to reconcile ourselves to the fact that a large proportion of these people aren’t interested in engaging with this debate.”
Tom,
As I was saying, the opposing side isn’t backing up their claims either (Kara is a good example) so they appear to be guilty of the same sin… and are thus equally responsible for the lack of actual debate.
Delia
P.S. It seems to be a silly game of lets see who can yell louder and can get more of “their friends” to yell along with them… D.
Showing posts with label BuzzMachine. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BuzzMachine. Show all posts
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
friendship (being realistic...)
re: “First, I think it means that they will maintain friendships and other relationships longer in life.”
Jeff,
I would think again… We all have limited time. I doubt those who claim to have more than a handful of (actual) friends. Makes me think they are counting acquaintances as friends — they don’t know the difference.
This is the trap (well… on of them…) Facebook and other “social networks” seem to exploit: “come over here! you’ll keep more friendships than you ever imagined! — just send an itty-bitty note to everybody you know every now and then”… right:)… that’s just going to cause you to lose your actual friends while chasing some meaningless number…
Just imagine *all* those people from your past would have responded and would have been ready to spend the amount of time needed for an actual friendship for indefinite time –> COULD you have done it? (I’m not asking *would* you have done it — I’m assuming you would have *liked* to do it… you just couldn’t have possibly fit all of them in for the long run…)
Delia
MORE:
Jeff, I see the same problem with your argument: it seems to ignore what it takes to keep actual friendships and what is a feasible number of such friendships and goes along with the social networks’ self-interested presentation of mere contacts as friends. D.
Jeff,
I would think again… We all have limited time. I doubt those who claim to have more than a handful of (actual) friends. Makes me think they are counting acquaintances as friends — they don’t know the difference.
This is the trap (well… on of them…) Facebook and other “social networks” seem to exploit: “come over here! you’ll keep more friendships than you ever imagined! — just send an itty-bitty note to everybody you know every now and then”… right:)… that’s just going to cause you to lose your actual friends while chasing some meaningless number…
Just imagine *all* those people from your past would have responded and would have been ready to spend the amount of time needed for an actual friendship for indefinite time –> COULD you have done it? (I’m not asking *would* you have done it — I’m assuming you would have *liked* to do it… you just couldn’t have possibly fit all of them in for the long run…)
Delia
MORE:
Jeff, I see the same problem with your argument: it seems to ignore what it takes to keep actual friendships and what is a feasible number of such friendships and goes along with the social networks’ self-interested presentation of mere contacts as friends. D.
Saturday, October 27, 2007
Facebook tricks?
MORE:
Matt,
I'm just curious if you read the "fine print" when you joined Facebook and were aware what were the limits (if any...) of Facebook using the private info you presumably gave them for the purpose of using Facebook...
Delia
.......
re:"When Facebook uses the private information I give them in a play to target me when I’m away from Facebook, that’s a direction I don’t wish to be a part of."
I think you are right, Terry... and I doubt people knowingly consented to Facebook basically using people's private information against *themselves* -- you'd think at some point they are going to feel they got tricked and just walk away...
Delia
P.S. I think a non-profit competitor to Facebook that would safeguard people's private information instead of abusing it would eventually put Facebook out of business... (just like a non-profit competitor to craigslist that would use the profits that have reached ridiculous levels on customer service and improvements instead of ending up in the shareholders' pockets would probably make craigslist irrelevant in time) D.
Matt,
I'm just curious if you read the "fine print" when you joined Facebook and were aware what were the limits (if any...) of Facebook using the private info you presumably gave them for the purpose of using Facebook...
Delia
.......
re:"When Facebook uses the private information I give them in a play to target me when I’m away from Facebook, that’s a direction I don’t wish to be a part of."
I think you are right, Terry... and I doubt people knowingly consented to Facebook basically using people's private information against *themselves* -- you'd think at some point they are going to feel they got tricked and just walk away...
Delia
P.S. I think a non-profit competitor to Facebook that would safeguard people's private information instead of abusing it would eventually put Facebook out of business... (just like a non-profit competitor to craigslist that would use the profits that have reached ridiculous levels on customer service and improvements instead of ending up in the shareholders' pockets would probably make craigslist irrelevant in time) D.
Thursday, December 14, 2006
academia going down...
... the drain
note: if you are annoyed by ads (especially the animated kind) just don't visit the BuzzMachine at night... I mean that seems to be what's going on... (I thought I was halucinating at first but I'm positive there was an animated Treo ad running *at night*, but that seems to be the only time...)
note: if you are annoyed by ads (especially the animated kind) just don't visit the BuzzMachine at night... I mean that seems to be what's going on... (I thought I was halucinating at first but I'm positive there was an animated Treo ad running *at night*, but that seems to be the only time...)
MORE: my post
I agree with Robert (on the general idea) — academia wondering off from the objectivity goal is even scarier than the press doing that (maybe we need to deal with ideology the same why we deal with religion — they seem to be very similar at the fundamental level: you just need to *believe* and… stop thinking!) D.
Monday, December 11, 2006
Sunday, December 10, 2006
interesting experiment...
Jeff,
Interesting experiment, except the other way around: get “the internet” to assemble a news portal that ignores newspaper and wire services for 24 hours after their release on the internet and see how well it would or would not work.
Delia
P.S. Wondering if NA could test this (just state the premise and invite contributors). You’d probably have to do it for quite some time before you conclude if it could work and how well.
I guess it could have been worse...
MORE: my post...
*testing, testing…*
Jeff,
I don’t know why you killed my last comment: maybe because I said “hi!” to a fellow commenter? (I figured it was just a nice thing to do… ) or because I wanted to get his input on my suggestion for NAN (is that forbidden *???*); anyways, would have been nice to know… not lastly so I could get some sort of a clue whether or not I should bother to make any more comments on your blog).
re: ”Craig didn’t kill it. He was merely the first and smartest to see that the internet connects buyers and sellers directly.”
You may well be right, but that’s certainly not Craig’s story. If you are not buying his story (that he was just a do-gooder that sort of stumbled into it) and believe that, on the contrary, he *purposefully* (out of his smarts or whatever) built a market on the internet… that’s good to know…
Delia
P.S. Oh… and I agree with the other commenter that he *is* the middleman (for every ad where he charges a fee) — he’s basically just moved a (for the most part) existing market on the internet (pretty smart thing to do! but if that would have been craigslist’s declared raison d’etre… I don’t think he would have gotten anywhere this far…). D.
(http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/11/20/the-yahoos-and-yahoo/#comment-205695)
...
... and wondering what does Jeff Jarvis *really* think about Craig's story...
*testing, testing…*
Jeff,
I don’t know why you killed my last comment: maybe because I said “hi!” to a fellow commenter? (I figured it was just a nice thing to do… ) or because I wanted to get his input on my suggestion for NAN (is that forbidden *???*); anyways, would have been nice to know… not lastly so I could get some sort of a clue whether or not I should bother to make any more comments on your blog).
re: ”Craig didn’t kill it. He was merely the first and smartest to see that the internet connects buyers and sellers directly.”
You may well be right, but that’s certainly not Craig’s story. If you are not buying his story (that he was just a do-gooder that sort of stumbled into it) and believe that, on the contrary, he *purposefully* (out of his smarts or whatever) built a market on the internet… that’s good to know…
Delia
P.S. Oh… and I agree with the other commenter that he *is* the middleman (for every ad where he charges a fee) — he’s basically just moved a (for the most part) existing market on the internet (pretty smart thing to do! but if that would have been craigslist’s declared raison d’etre… I don’t think he would have gotten anywhere this far…). D.
(http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/11/20/the-yahoos-and-yahoo/#comment-205695)
...
... and wondering what does Jeff Jarvis *really* think about Craig's story...
to critique or not to critique...?
MORE: my post...
re: “I chose to concentrate instead on the opportunities”
Jeff,
Well… it’s hard to critique your stuff if it’s not *supposed* to be balanced… The way I see it, this “new journalism” can certainly do a much better job of giving people what they want and getting them to participate at a level previously impossible.
But would that be enough to fulfill the traditional function of journalism? To at least STRIVE to give a *balanced view* of what’s going on around us and thus act as one of the prongs of democracy? Unless you think that peoples’ aggregate special interests would necessarily lead there (and I see no good reason to believe that), that is the essential thing that would be lost (and it’s no small thing).
And what happens if the “old journalism” collapses before a functioning new one (however insufficient) takes over? (quite possible…) That’s why I don’t think that “accelerating” the process (“exploding” things before their time) is such a good idea…
But if you are *expected* to be the CHEERLEADER… you are certainly doing a fine job at that!
But if you are *expected* to be the CHEERLEADER… you are certainly doing a fine job at that!
Delia
(http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/11/11/edit-me/#comment-195206)...
when in doubt... call them "cheerleader"?
(isn't that a term of endearment?)
(isn't that a term of endearment?)
the future of journalism
Jeff,
This all sounds nice and dandy (re: “I am most optimistic about the fate of journalism”)… but I’m wondering if anything worries you? Assume all the promise of the “new journalism” comes true, would there be anything essential missing?
Delia
(http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/11/11/edit-me/#comment-193457)
re: “I chose to concentrate instead on the opportunities”
Jeff,
Well… it’s hard to critique your stuff if it’s not *supposed* to be balanced… The way I see it, this “new journalism” can certainly do a much better job of giving people what they want and getting them to participate at a level previously impossible.
But would that be enough to fulfill the traditional function of journalism? To at least STRIVE to give a *balanced view* of what’s going on around us and thus act as one of the prongs of democracy? Unless you think that peoples’ aggregate special interests would necessarily lead there (and I see no good reason to believe that), that is the essential thing that would be lost (and it’s no small thing).
And what happens if the “old journalism” collapses before a functioning new one (however insufficient) takes over? (quite possible…) That’s why I don’t think that “accelerating” the process (“exploding” things before their time) is such a good idea…
But if you are *expected* to be the CHEERLEADER… you are certainly doing a fine job at that!
Delia
(http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/11/11/edit-me/#comment-195206)
This all sounds nice and dandy (re: “I am most optimistic about the fate of journalism”)… but I’m wondering if anything worries you? Assume all the promise of the “new journalism” comes true, would there be anything essential missing?
Delia
(http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/11/11/edit-me/#comment-193457)
re: “I chose to concentrate instead on the opportunities”
Jeff,
Well… it’s hard to critique your stuff if it’s not *supposed* to be balanced… The way I see it, this “new journalism” can certainly do a much better job of giving people what they want and getting them to participate at a level previously impossible.
But would that be enough to fulfill the traditional function of journalism? To at least STRIVE to give a *balanced view* of what’s going on around us and thus act as one of the prongs of democracy? Unless you think that peoples’ aggregate special interests would necessarily lead there (and I see no good reason to believe that), that is the essential thing that would be lost (and it’s no small thing).
And what happens if the “old journalism” collapses before a functioning new one (however insufficient) takes over? (quite possible…) That’s why I don’t think that “accelerating” the process (“exploding” things before their time) is such a good idea…
But if you are *expected* to be the CHEERLEADER… you are certainly doing a fine job at that!
Delia
(http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/11/11/edit-me/#comment-195206)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)