Best wishes
This is a great story, first person about the reporter who wrote it. Not too dramatic or sappy; realistic and meaningful.
And rather popular, too.
Best wishes, Christine.
Entries Tagged as ''
Acknowledge the power of giving people a voice
Looks like a picked a good time to start reading Stowe Boyd’s blog (thanks to continual references from Shel Holtz and Neville Hobson). In a post from about 10 days ago, Stowe writes about Andrew Keen, whom I’ve never heard of. Apparently Andrew doesn’t like new “Web 2.0″ toys and the (debatable) impact their having.
Keen calls the Cluetrain Manifesto — actually, the theses within — “childish.” I might not agree with them all, but I wouldn’t consider them childish or naive, which I think Keen is confusing with “simple and straightforward.”
Keen also draws out the stupid “70 million blogs” stat and refers to the blogosphere (is there a worse word in the world?) as “our own electronic diaries, our own half-informed opinions, our own stupidity and ignorance.” I hate the “70 million” stat as a defense — “Yuh huh! Blogging is to cool!” — and I hate it even more when its used in conjunction with “…but most of them are worthless.”
Yeah, most of them are worthless to most people. But I don’t care about “most of them.” I care that now I can get the scoops and info of TechCrunch, the professional insight and camaraderie for For Immediate Release, and the piles of other great information and entertainment I get from people I never would have heard of were it not for blogging and podcasting. It’s not about 70 million; in my case, it’s about the few dozens blogs and podcast that make up my list of must-read, -see or -hear.
New media are not killing or disintermediating traditional media; they are complementing traditional media. Expertise, authority and power (as they pertain to knowledge and the communication thereof) aren’t determined by ownership of an FCC license or a printing press. They are determined by the respect of others. Narcissistic and informationless blogs won’t earn respect, won’t establish experts, won’t wield power. Good blogs will.
Sweeping generalizations about the value or lack of value of blogs and podcasts won’t get us anywhere. I’m not asking you to give up the newspaper and devote yourself to new media. I ask that people acknowledge the power of giving more people a public voice.
PC Mag: Rubel’s tweet smells like twit
Steve Rubel must be cowering in fear. He can’t even bring himself to defend…himself, I guess. He’s so concerned about apologizing for a recent Twitter tweet that trashed (literally) PC Magazine.
Jim Louderback, the editor of PC Mag, is pissed. Rubel is apologizing. Comments are a-flyin’ all over the place, particularly on Rubel’s open-letter post.
I like the comment from Steve Coulson of crayon, who says Louderback is, to paraphrase with my own words, being childish and missing an opportunity to improve his magazine. But I see another issue:
I understand Rubel’s reason for the apology here (Jim’s response column on Strumpette paints a potentially ugly picture for some of Edelman’s clients — “I’ll probably be somewhat less inclined to take a meeting with one of Edelman’s clients”), but Rubel’s post would have meant a lot more if he actually explained what he meant in his offending tweet and just defended himself a bit.
Louderback guesses that, in just tossing the mag, Rubel apparently doesn’t even care to see if any of Edelman’s clients were covered in the magazine. Does he not realize that flipping through the paper pages isn’t the only way to find that out? And does Rubel not feel strongly enough to say, “Yeah, you can keep my print subscription. I’ve got your RSS feeds and your Web site, and that’s all I need from you. Thanks”?
And don’t even get me started on the thoughts I had about Jim’s childish (although seemingly sincere, which is great) response, in which he borders on abandoning any and all journalistic principles just to stick to Rubel and Edelman. Unless he’s acknowledging that PC Mag is just a PR pro’s wet dream of low editorial standards, why would it matter who’s pitching Adobe CS3 or Microsoft Whatever’sNext? Regardless of the relationship with the PR firm, shouldn’t his magazine cover what’s of interest to the audience — not what fits into the framework of the editor’s grudge-du-jour?
Hop in your Twitter-mobile and Drive
Brandflakes for Breakfast brings us a great post about the “best use of Twitter yet“: the producer of a Fox TV show is going to be Twittering (or is it “tweeting”?) during the premiere. One commenter at Brandflakes says, “This is about as exciting as a trip to the dentist.”
I disagree. Sure, if you’re not interested in the show, you’re not going to care about the Twittering of the show. And if you’re old, you’re likely to not care even if you do like the show. But for the type of people who are going to watch Fox’s “Drive,” this could be huge and, as Brandflakes says, genius.
Think about the potential this idea has, too. I’m just getting worked up for the Twins season, and I would love to have a trainer or a coach or benched player or even a reporter Twittering from the dugout. The uses are plenty. I’m quickly starting to like this Twitter thing, which I just started a few days ago.
Mad props to Kevin Dugan for this one.
Natch Watch: PRWeek strikes again
I hate when people say or write “natch.” It’s unnatural (pun-sort-of-thing intended) and ugly, and just because it’s in the dictionary doesn’t mean it’s a word. PRWeek’s blog has used this “word” before, and they’ve struck again today.
I like the PRWeek blog, but I don’t like this hideous “natch” thing. I actually feel moved to rant about whenever I see it. Thanks for allowing my arrogant, high-horse indulgence.
Kathy Sierra and Chris Locke
Kudos to Kathy Sierra and Chris Locke for this joint statement. Is the CNN segment on YouTube yet?
UPDATE: The video from CNN is available here.
MSNBC, you’re losing me
When the Wall Street Journal writes that MSNBC is ramping up it’s online news efforts…
“Instead of selling itself as a “breaking news” destination, as it once did, the site is trying to highlight the range of news and entertainment it offers.”
…all I can think is, “Great, more Anna Nicole Smith ‘news.’ ”
I am a media junkie — Web, print, broadcast, podcast — and I love MSNBC. Something about it just feels better than all of the other TV outlets. But damn, those folks are losing me quickly. I can’t stand one more damn minute about Anna Nicole Smith or Paris Hilton.
For god’s sake, Joe Scarborough used to be a damn congressman. Now his show’s “highlight” is a segment called “Hollyweird.” It’s nice that he’s not fawning over the celebs, but doesn’t he have better things to talk about?
RSS feed
Google Friend Connect
Copyright © 2008 Unjournalism. Content by Mike Keliher.
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.