Gerard Grow’s Website: Biggest writing problems caused by computers are: people editing rather than rethinking; the confusion caused by “collaborative writing” where people rewrite each others material; and the temptation to reuse blocks of text from other works.
Category Archives: Uncategorized
Good reading from ACBJ — March 28
Atlanta Business Chronicle — Filling ‘er up costs UPS $1.4 billion
Atlanta Business Chronicle — Levittown creators build active adult neighborhood in Canton
Cincinnati Business Courier — Medical professionals, public watch surgeries via Internet
Eastbay Business Times — Chiron struggles to rebuild credibility for flu season
Houston Business Journal — Toyota test-driving rental car concept in Houston
Business First of Louisville — Trucking industry faces long road as fuel costs rise
Silicon Valley / San Jose Business Journal — Energy market heats up for private power plant projects
Good reading from ACBJ — March 21
East Bay Business Times — E-mail snooping becomes an industry standard
Kansas City Business Journal — Spike in coffee prices percolating to local businesses
Philadelphia Business Journal — Drexel School of Education to give iPods to freshmen
Pittsburgh Business Times — Debate over regulation of toxic chemicals heats up
Puget Sound Business Journal — MSN vs. Google: Major effort not yet turning tide
Newspapers want to charge, but will it cost too much?
NY Times — Can Papers End the Free Ride Online?. As mentioned earlier this year, the NY Times is considering charging for access to its site. Today’s article says the plan will be announced soon (many predictions of an April announcement). Whether to charge or not is an issues facing many newspapers, these days. Online advertising is growing and spending for other online services, such as music downloads, is growing, at a rapid rate. But newspapers that charges will lose a large amount of page views, and online advertising revenue.
Perhaps the biggest obstacle for newspapers is that online readers have been conditioned to expect free news. “Most newspapers believe that if they charged for the Web, the number of users would decline to such an extent that their advertising revenues would decline more than they get from charging users,” said Gary B. Pruitt, chairman and chief executive of the McClatchy Company, which publishes The Sacramento Bee, The Star Tribune in Minneapolis and other papers, which do not charge for their Web sites.
After the NY Times piece, Ken Sands, online publisher of The Spokesman-Review in Spokane, Wash., posted a good response to the story on the Online News discussion list. Susan Mernit posted his replay, including:
(w)e really have no choice but to look for a better business model. If print circulation and advertising drop significantly, there’s probably no way an increase in online revenue can make up the difference. Who’s going to pay all of the reporters and editors? Maybe those of us who are left in the future will simply aggregate and edit the news that’s provided by citizen journalists. I don’t pretend to have all of the answers, but you can’t say we aren’t looking…”,
Summary on The State of The News Media
This week, The Project for Excellence in Journalism made its second annual report on The State of the News Media.
Intro from the overview
Today, technology is transforming citizens from passive consumers of news produced by professionals into active participants who can assemble their own journalism from disparate elements. As people “Google” for information, graze across an infinite array of outlets, read blogs or write them, they are becoming their own editors, researchers, and even correspondents. What was called journalism is only one part of the mix, and its role as intermediary and verifier, like the roles of other civic institutions, is weakening. We are witnessing the rise of a new and more active kind of American citizenship – with new responsibilities that are only beginning to be considered.
> There are now several models of journalism, and the trajectory increasingly is toward those that are faster, looser, and cheaper.
> The rise in partisanship of news consumption and the notion that people have retreated to their ideological corners for news has been widely exaggerated.
> To adapt, journalism may have to move in the direction of making its work more transparent and more expert, and of widening the scope of its searchlight.
> Despite the new demands, there is more evidence than ever that the mainstream media are investing only cautiously in building new audiences.
> The three broadcast network news divisions face their most important moment of transition in decades.
In a sense, news consumption today should probably be viewed in the way diet is viewed in this age of plentiful, fast and often processed American food. The array of offerings is so vast and varied, being concerned mainly with what is offered seems futile; the proper concern may involve educating consumers about what they should imbibe.
The real crisis may be news obesity, consuming too little that can nourish citizens and too much that can bloat them.
The question is not whether online advertising will continue to grow, but whether it will ever be big enough to supply the resources to newsrooms we have come to think of as sufficient for quality journalism – and whether it will flow to the organizations that produce journalism, or to those that simply aggregate and pass it on. Will newsgathering organizations that produce what is on the Web benefit, or will processors like Google or Yahoo?
For online journalism to thrive ultimately, some people believe a combined subscription and advertising model for the medium will be necessary. A few outlets are beginning to explore the possibility of bundling sources, as occurs in cable, so that consumers would pay a fee to both the Internet provider for access and to those who create the content.
Consumers are still resistant to paying for Internet journalism, and experiments in 2004 were not promising. If no model is found to monetize the Web to approach the kinds of profit levels of older sectors, the impact could drastically affect the resources available for newsgathering.
Some 62% of Web professionals say their newsrooms have seen cutbacks in the last three years – despite huge increases in audiences online. That number is far bigger than the 37% of national print, radio and TV journalists who cited cutbacks in their newsrooms. Anecdotally, Web journalists say what investment there is tends to be in technology for processing information, not in journalists to gather news.
It is part of a larger trend in American journalism: much of the investment and effort is in repackaging and presenting information, not in gathering it. For all that the number of outlets has grown, the number of people engaged in collecting original information has not. Americans are frankly more likely to see the same pictures across multiple TV channels or read the same wire story in different venues than they were a generation ago.
Americans do not resent the sense of professional ethics or the aspirations or independence of the press. Rather, they feel journalism is not living up to those goals. They increasingly think the press as a whole is motivated by money and individual journalists by personal ambition.
A year ago, we saw in the larger trends something of a vicious cycle partly of the press’s own making.
As audiences declined, because of technological and cultural changes, news organizations felt pressure on revenues and stock performance. In response, they cut back on their newsrooms, squeezed in more advertising and cut back on the percentage of space devoted to news. They tried to respond to changing tastes, too, by lightening their content. Audiences appeared to gravitate to lighter topics, and those topics were often cheaper to cover. Those changes, in turn, deepened the sense that the news media were motivated by economics and less focused on professionalism and the public interest.
In 2005, the sense that the press’s role in relation to the public is changing seems ever clearer. A generation ago, the press was effectively a lone institution communicating between the citizenry and the newsmakers, whether corporations selling goods or politicians selling agendas, who wanted to shape public opinion for their own purposes. Today, a host of new forms of communication offer a way for newsmakers to reach the public. There are talk-show hosts, cable interview shows, corporate Web sites, government Web sites, Web sites that purport to be citizen blogs but are really something else, and more. Journalism is a shrinking part of a growing world of media. And since journalists are trained to be skeptics and aspire at least, in the famous phrase, to speak truth to power, journalism is the one source those who want to manipulate the public are most prone to denounce. The atmosphere for journalism, in other words, has become, as the legendary editor John Siegenthaler recently put it, “acidic.”
The challenge for traditional journalism is whether it can reassert its position as the provider of something distinctive and valuable – both for citizens and advertisers. The press continues to thrive financially because, while the audience collected in any one place may be smaller, it is still the largest venue available to advertisers. The trend lines, however, make clear that this, too, should not be taken for granted. Somehow journalism needs to prove that it is acting on behalf of the public, if it is to save itself.
The overall report includes in-depth looks at major news media groups, including newspapers, online and various divisions of TV.
Reflections on the report from: Dan Gillmor and Terry Heaton
Coping in the modern world
NY Times — No Need to Stew: A Few Tips to Cope with Life’s Annoyances:
“They’re an integral part of how people cope,” said Prof. James C. Scott, who teaches anthropology and political science at Yale University, and the author of “Weapons of the Weak,” about the feigned ignorance, foot-dragging and other techniques Malaysian peasants used to avoid cooperating with the arrival of new technology in the 1970’s. “All societies have them, but they’re successful only to the extent that they avoid open confrontation.”
Recent clippings on making money blogging
* Buzzworthy — Blog Summit reflections. Brian Chin lists his highlights from a Blog Business Summit from January. including ways to make a business from blogging, talking to bloggers, blogging as just a communications technology and that blogging is still no substitute for meeting people in person. Brian also wrote of earlier impressions about the summit
* Problogger — Interview with Glenn Fleishman. Glenn, who has blogged for several years, is interviewed about Entrepreneurial Blogging, trying to make a business out of blogging. He also presented at the Blog Business Summit.
* USA Today — Google’s AdSense a bonanza for some Web sites looks at how AdSense is paying some bloggers more than the cost of the hosting service. Yahoo! will compete against AdSense with its new service expected to be announced this week, according to several media, including CNET.
* AdSense Secrets — What Google never told you about Making Money with AdSense. — New book tell you to earn five-figure income with AdSense. PDF version costs only $99. Tip from Lockergnome, with a testimonial from Chris Pirillo.
* Washington Post — Make Money off Your Blog mentions AdSense, BlogAds, and some self-run ideas.
Good reading from ACBJ — March 14
Atlanta Business Chronicle — The man behind Rathergate: Atlanta attorney, the blogger ‘Buckhead,’ first discredited anchor’s report
Atlanta Business Chronicle — Federal prisoners going to work
Milwaukee Business Journal — No health coverage? No degree: More colleges requiring students to enroll in health care plans
Nashville Business Journal — Local Publix store to sell gasoline
My car wish list
2005 Honda Accord, reviewed by Forbes. Also Accord was top pick by Consumer Reports.
Propaganda or video news release?
NY Times — Under Bush, a New Age of Prepackaged Television News. The government has made for several years video press releases where they hire people to perform interviews and package the material like interviews.
Video releases were started under the Clinton administration and continues with the Bush administration. Segments are sent to TV stations. At this point there’s little difference between video and traditional press release.
Many corporations also do this Medialink Worldwide Inc. is a major business in this industry, according to the article.
TV stations air the pieces, but do they let viewers know this is a prepared piece by the interested party? Too often they don’t. There’s where the foul occurs. Readers or viewers can decide the credibility of the material shown, just let them know the source of the information.
It’s a lengthy article, but it’s great reading when the news directors try to explain or don’t bother explaining why they showed the segments without letting viewers know the source. Also the need to cut costs at local television stations make video press releases a tempting solution in filling the need for material.