killing the messenger

#@: Twitter Censorship & The Importance of Reason vs. Reaction

What's all the uproar about Twitter's 'new' censorship policy?  Perhaps it's time for the Twit-i-sphere to take a collective breath and actually take the time to consider the facts, think things over, then react if necessary.  The hyperbolic desire to RT an immediate need for protest is doing a disservice to the 'net as a whole.  If folks would bother to read and discuss as opposed to rabidly re-tweeting another boycott proposal, they might learn a few things about the Network upon which they Socialize.  Here's an excerpt from Twitter's announcement:

"As we continue to grow internationally, we will enter countries that have different ideas about the contours of freedom of expression. Some differ so much from our ideas that we will not be able to exist there. Others are similar but, for historical or cultural reasons, restrict certain types of content, such as France or Germany, which ban pro-Nazi content. Until now, the only way we could take account of those countries’ limits was to remove content globally. Starting today, we give ourselves the ability to reactively withhold content from users in a specific country — while keeping it available in the rest of the world. We have also built in a way to communicate transparently to users when content is withheld, and why. We haven’t yet used this ability, but if and when we are required to withhold a Tweet in a specific country, we will attempt to let the user know, and we will clearly mark when the content has been withheld. As part of that transparency, we’ve expanded our partnership with Chilling Effects to share this new page, http://chillingeffects.org/twitter, which makes it easier to find notices related to Twitter."

The internet and it's tools provide wonderful oportunities for self-governance.  Unfortunately, the desire for immediate gratification quicky spirals to blind ignorance and can create a snowball of misleading or misguided information that is difficult to slow down.

UPDATE: Thank you Boing Boing. (excerpt:) "We keep talking of activism as content: it's as privileged a viewpoint as you'll ever get from the silicon tower of tech journalism, where the act of disclosure is more virtuous than having nothing to disclose, and where the West's ethical feather-plucking is more real than the reality of politics in dangerous places. Silicon Valley seems finally to be learning the lesson that if you sell yourself on virtue, the business will make you eat your words. Twitter's U-turn on censorship teaches it another one: if you take credit for what activists do with your tools, you'll end up eating their words, too."

After The Blackout: Now What?

Does considering signature content models relate to better solutions for news corporations in an on-line world?  The entertainment industry continues to seek monetizing of video on the web, while news organizations seek employees who understand it.  Online news orgs already understand it, and struggle to maintain objectivity and independence.  On blackout Wed., numerous congresspersons stated their intent to change votes on SOPA/PIPA, but are these empty promises?  Does this lead down the path of a consumption driven internet, or are we already there?  Wikipedia, fresh off the MSM attention of the past 48hrs, intends to follow up.  Leahy and Dodd aren't ready to lay down arms.  One thing is certain, the fight for internet regulation isn't going to end just because some of the lights were turned out for a day.

 

#SOPA: Why Is MSM Mum?

During  the struggle to maintain net neutrality, mainstream media networks have under-reported and perhaps ignored coverage of SOPA and ProtectIP.  (In the buildup to tomorrow's celebrated 'blackout', and perhaps with the help of Rupert Murdoch's pro-SOPA tweeting,  they're starting to pay attention).   Fingers point toward paid indiference, but it is perhaps worth considering that overall the networks under report, don't report and flatout miss the boat on most news. But have they really missed the boat?  For the past few years, all of the big stories on CNN, MSNBC, ABC, FOX, etc. have included phone cam footage, citizen reports, reporters tweeting, presenters anylizing twitter on large graphic displays, working off laptops, referencing data, etc.  It's certainly a noble cause, to petition the networks to end the pointed ignorance of SOPA news.  But it might be worth considering Dan Gillmor's point -  that The MSM isn't ignoring OR ignorant of the internet, it's trying to control it.

*UPDATE: Obviously, the tide turned quickly in the past 24hrs as almost every major news network, including Al Jazeera, the BBC and other international broadcasters have suddenly and relentlessly begun covering the Blackout and SOPA/ProtectIP.  What a difference a day - and a blackout -  makes.

Investigating A Killing: Gilles Jacquier

Gilles Jacquier was killed in Homs, Syria last week.  He was one of France's most respected journalists, and the French government has openned an investigation into his murder. From CPJ:

"The Syrian officials were the only ones to know that a group of Western journalists were visiting Homs on this day and in which neighborhood they were," the high-level source said, according Le Figaro. "You can of course think of an unhappy accident. But it comes rather well for a regime that tries to discourage foreign journalists and to demonize the rebellion."

#SOPA: Parsing The Language For A Different Perspective

An interesting parsing of the anti-SOPA argument, from Ron Garret - an interesting chap.  Excerpt:

"Political arguments are often lost before they even start because one side allows the other to frame the debate... the tacit acceptance of the term "intellectual property rights" concedes the fight before it starts. If there are intellectual property rights, then the debate can only be about the extent to which the state should go in order to defend those rights. But, as I have shown above, there is no legal basis for intellectual property "rights", only intellectual property "grants" (for limited times and for a specific purpose). I hope it's clear how this reframing would change the tenor of the debate."

Which begs consideration in sequence with Tim O'Reilly's comments on piracy. Excerpt:

"In the entire discussion, I've seen no discussion of credible evidence of this economic harm. There's no question in my mind that piracy exists, that people around the world are enjoying creative content without paying for it, and even that some criminals are profiting by redistributing it. But is there actual economic harm?"

The Argument For Fact Checking

Arthur S Brisbane, the NYT's public editor, asked the following poorly worded question in this column in yesterday's Times.  A Public Editor at the NYT, as defined by Bill Keller, is assigned “to hold us accountable to our own standards, to serve as an advocate for the interests of readers, and to give readers an independent eye into the workings of this great news organization.”  Brisbane's Thursday column leads off with this: "I’m looking for reader input on whether and when New York Times news reporters should challenge “facts” that are asserted by newsmakers they write about."  Please refrain from all snarky, cynical and outrageously valid gufaws for a moment.  Krugman interviewed Brisbane after the firestorm errupted on the net: "I was hoping for diverse and even nuanced responses to what I think is a difficult question".  Which begs the question - then why'd you ask it in such a clunky, very distinctly un-nuanced way?  And of course, now Brisbane's been busy blogging up his mea culpa, aka 'what I really meant was' follow up post.  All of which spins out of the original old-school v new school 'how should the news media cover the news' debate.  Here's what Shirky, Rosen & Greenwald had to say.  In the end, Brisbane seems to get what he wanted - his badly worded question leads to nuanced and informed open debate about how the news is reported.

#Journalism: No Longer Not A Game?

 

This is a video game in which the player is a war correspondent in Darfur.  The developers plan a series; Afghanistan is next.

"On the Ground Reporter Darfur is the first game in the “On the Ground Reporter” series (A Dutch-language only Afghanistan version has recently been released). This game was funded in part by Free Press Unlimited, an international organization that focuses on strengthening the capacity of local media professionals and NCDO, a Dutch advisory center for citizenship and international cooperation."

Old School, New School, How About Now?

Is the mainstream press out of touch?  With newspapers being the manifest representation of old school, it's interesting to note the numbers of newspaper apps downloaded in the past quarter.  Starkey certainly has old-school followers in his saber rattle with Shirky and co. On the new-school side (among numerous examples) Gigaom has Matt Ingram break down Fast Company's interview with Nick Kristof,  specifically his observations on #occupy and citizen journalism.  Kristof and Ingram point out the valued presence of accidental and citizen cameras and phones on the scene at occupy.  Nick Kristof is an accredited journalist, with an armload of tenure in the profession, and he's able to use both the traditional press and his immediately available, socially networked tools to do his job from the field - to report.  His tweets from Bahrain were valuable professional (informed, verified, neuanced) observations in real time.  He's not the only mainstream reporter who's tweeting while filing for the trad deadline.  As but one example, C.J. Chivers continues to put out rapidfire tweets and tumblr postings that go beyond his already stellar pieces in the NYT.  Accidental and citizen journalists - occupiers and middle-eastern kids, use the same tools. The audience, the news viewers, readers, networkers recieve both reporters work as news. The reporters view their work as news, as the voicing of a witness to history.  Who they work for -or don't - in that instant is irrelevant.  Journalism in the new era is directly impacted by efforts to control the internet, creating a need for journalists to advocate for better policy in how the tools of their trade are regulated. Arguing the minutia of how the news is reported is distracting energy in our current newsstream.  To protect journalists, we should all take a deeper interest in respecting journalism as a collective voice and protect the tools that bring us The News.

 

#OpenJournalism: Tools To Change The narrative

The construct of Open Journalism is developing before our eyes.  Action is practice.  Rational guidance is available.

#CitizensAgenda: Retooling The narrative

It's an election year.  How would you really want to see the process reported on by the media?  By what media?  What if you could make the choice?

An interesting project is underway with help from The Guardian, ProPublica and NYU.  Jay Rosen and Amanda Michel, along with students in NYU's Studio 20 program aim to radically alter how the 2012 US election cycle is turned into news.  The refreshing approach involves the combining of cutting edge strategy, tactics, and tools with oldschool factchecking, analysis and dogged reporting.

excerpts from The Guardian:

"The citizens agenda is a simple concept, and our approach is fairly straightforward: we aim to identify and articulate the citizens agenda, and to help set up the Guardian for its general election coverage by experimenting with citizens agenda features and approaches. Studio 20 students will work alongside the Guardian's journalists in brainstorming, designing and managing features on guardiannews.com through early May 2012. Together, we will arrive at the picture of how people want journalists to cover the election through a number of traditional and non-traditional methods, including sampling science, internet polling, web forms, social media, old fashioned reporting, discussions and debates, experimental features, plus staff and user-generated content....

Working parallel to the Guardian's project will be local newsrooms doing essentially the same thing, but for statewide and local elections. The Media News and Journal Register companies, under the joint management of Digital First Media, plan to develop the citizens agenda approach in their own election coverage, collaborating with the Guardian on the best ways to discern what voters want the campaign to be about. We hope that other local news organisations will want to join in as the experiment takes shape. The more that do, the better our chances for learning how to do it right."