This month our host asks:

How do you decide to dedicate time to a new tool/platform/gadget? What is the process you go through mentally? And then later – how do you convince others to go through that process? And, last: How do you ensure that the tools you do adopt are used once the “newness” factor fades?

This is a great question and one tied very much to a class I just gave at UC Berkeley’s J-school.

One of the things I started with was showing this list of web tools from Robert Hernandez (the ying to my yang).

That’s a LOT of tools. More than you can probably teach even in a two-hour lecture. My goal, however, is not to teach specific tools, but to teach a mind-set of problem solving. For every pain-point there is a solution and that’s when you’ve come across a good tool. If a hammer didn’t get the job done, it would be a bad tool.

When I start to think about using a new tool/platform/gadget this is what goes through my mind:

1. I start with a “yes attitude.” Hey new site – do I want to give you a try, sure!
2. Is it simple to use. Yes – great. No, too bad for that tool/gadget/platform – I probably won’t come back.
3. If it is simple to use – does it have an intended purpose.

There is an important distinction to make between a strategy and a tactic. A strategy is an intended goal or outcome. A tactic is a way to get there. In checkers the strategy is to eliminate all the checkers of the other player. A tactic might be to get one of your checkers to the other side of the board so you can make that checker a king. That’s a tactic which can help achieve your goal. Another might be to try and set up a triple jump.

Most platforms/tools/gadgets are tactical – not strategic. You should always keep your strategy in mind so that you can evaluate a tool about whether or not it’s helping to achieve that final goal.

The right tool for the right job.

You don’t use a sledge hammer to knock in a nail. Similarly you don’t need to use Storify if all you’re doing is aggregating two or three tweets. You don’t need to use TweetDeck if you only manage one twitter account. That’s overkill and while it can get the job done – it creates more stress than it’s worth sometimes.

The three steps above is part of the mental checklist I go through after I’ve signed up for a tool/platform. I don’t start with cynicism, I grant that somebody took time/energy to think about a particular pain-point and how they might solve it. But if after I’ve begun using the tool I find it difficult or pointless, I’m out.

Once a tool proves its worth to me – the next question is if it’ll become part of my routine. For that again I need to find a simple way to use it. If it creates more work for me than it’s worth – the relationship won’t last. Twitter is a great example because the tool is so flexible (you can put whatever content you want in it) I’ve seen people who use it as a way to take notes during live news events. What a FANTASTIC use of the tool. Not only does it have an intended purpose – but it doesn’t create more energy, in fact, it reduces it.

If a tool can’t become part of your regular work-flow (or solve a pain point in your workflow) it’s not a good tool. The only wrong tool is one that doesn’t work for you!

Convincing others to use a new tool is a different question all together. I must confess, I don’t know if I’m the best at getting other folks to jump into the waters of various tools. I certainly evangelize certain tools like xPad, Jing, TextExpander, Nudgemail, etc – all of which have made my life easier. The only thing I can really do is lead by example and just share the tools that have truly made my life easier. If they don’t – what would I have to show for it?

Then seemingly out of nowhere the CEO of Yahoo is kicked out and a “For Sale” sign is put up on their front yard.

Both Yahoo! and AOL were technology giants that are moving to become media entities. AOL doesn’t hide it with the HUGE investment in Patch and acquiring HuffingtonPost. Yahoo perhaps made the shift too coy and thus might have to start breaking apart. Yahoo hasn’t made the drastic switch of resources that AOL has and the potential sale might be a direct reflection of poor internal investments. Now AOL’s big bet might not win – but at least it was a conscious bet that the company made to become a content creator of massive proportions. I think Yahoo always rested its laurels on being a search company with a few social properties here and there (they never utilized Delicious or Flickr that well).

And thus the lesson below…..

Technology companies must understand that they are also media companies.

Media companies must understand that they are also technology companies.

Why?

Because the two are married.

Let’s take a step back to get here.

1. All media is social

The intent of media is to communicate something to people. Skirting the “if a tree falls in a forest” question – I’d say that all media is social.

2. Then what the hell is social media?

What we call “social media” is a misnomer given #1 above. A more proper understanding of it might be “minute media” or media about minutia (then again, ‘minutia’ is all about perspective; ‘dog bites man’ is big news to the man’s family). When blogs bursted on the scene in the early 2000′s we saw some of this minute media. It turns out that was just a crack in the damn. The real wave of minute media came around life-casting ie: Twitter, Facebook updates, etc. But this is all media.

3. Minute media is made possible by technology.

See: the Internet, the falling cost of publishing, etc.

4. If technology powers this rapidly evolving media (it defines the medium) then technology companies are media companies. That might not mean “journalism” companies – but media companies nonetheless.

Netflix, Hulu, Facebook, Twitter and more are all technology companies that make their money because of the media they produce or enable.

Even Apple is a media company to some degree. They build hardware with the intent of syncing it to their very massive and user-friendly media store iTunes.

Some of this is not news for folks (Lisa Williams may be the first person I heard to clearly state this). When I look at AOL’s and Yahoo’s moves it strikes me as apparent and something to take pause to notice. AOL, while often berated for patch, should be applauded because while most technology companies that move into media deal with ‘content’ AOL made a specific goal to do community journalism.

So where does this leave media companies?

They must move to become more like technology companies. They must learn to either create their own platforms for minute media or truly adopt/adapt to other platforms. They must find and define the platforms that enable the type of media they want to support. This, I believe, starts where Jeff Jarvis’ post about platforms being journalism leaves off. It’s not that platforms are journalism – it’s that technology enables media and journalism is a type of media that requires a type of platform. Journalists love to complain about Demand Media, for example, but it’s a beautiful case where a media company has built a technology platform to support the type of media they want to make. I agree, it’s not journalism – but then journalists must BUILD the platform that enables their type of media or pray somebody else does. Newspapers should define that technology platform instead of waiting for somebody else to build it for them (charging them an arm and a leg in the process).

I’m a little under the weather so I’m not even going to give this a second read/edit. But hey, this is my semi-minute media space. It’ll hopefully be interesting to somebody.

Still in its infancy Google+ has been the topic of many-a-tech blogposts. As a former tech-writer I love and hate this stuff. Sometimes I want to slap Mashable right in the ‘http’ and tell them to never do another “Top X Ways [name your industry professionals] Can Use [new social networking tool].” If you are curious though – here are the  top five ways journalists can use Google+ courtesy of Mashable.

Equally I want to avoid speculation about Google vs. Facebook. There is already plenty of that. If a Facebook executive has a sneeze that sounds like ‘ahh-choogle’ the tech-press is all over it. I personally am not a fan of Facebook and welcome my Google+ overlords. I do have a post in me about privacy, silicon valley speculation, etc – but I don’t want to add my voice to that already loud chorus.

Instead I want to write about Google+ in terms of everyday average use. Both how journalists use the Internet and how everyday average people use the internet (assuming the later is slightly different).

Sure enough 10,000 Words (the Mashable of journalism blogging) recently did a post on the top 10 ways journalists use the Internet. This is the ENTIRE internet mind you – but the results of the study are revealing. According to research journalists use the Internet for….

1. Reading news
2. Searching for news sources/story idea
3. Social networking
4. Micro-blogging
5. Blogging
6. Watching webinars/webcasts
7. Watching YouTube
8. Exploring Wikis
9. Producing/listening to podcasts
10. Social bookmarking

By rough estimate I’d say six of those activities can be encapsulated by Google+ in a way that Facebook doesn’t (partly because Facebook looks like a user-interface designer puked on the screen). One could argue with Google Hangouts you can add another one or two activities to the count and considering the network is still young, who knows where it could go.

While I won’t venture what the top 10 Internet activities are for non-journalists I suspect the majority of them are social in nature, including email (gmail having lots of penetration) and research (Google again). Now we can start to see some real Epic 2014 scariness/potential.

The real lesson here is that journalists on Google+ should keep in mind how they are using the platform and how the public might be using the platform. The two aren’t necessarily the same and all-too often we think the rest of the world uses web technology the same way we do. Whenever I want to be humbled I watch a member of my family use the computer and think to myself – ignorance is bliss.

The reason to be on Google+ isn’t because it’s the newest, hottest, sexiest thing. That might be a good reason to be on it as an individual (hard to seperate) but not why you should be on it as a journalist. You should be on these sites to understand how people are communicating and the vocabulary of this communication. Friendster informed MySpace which informed Facebook which informed Google+. If you ignore these sites you will fail to understand how a growing portion of the population deals with the flow of information and inevitably how more people will deal with this flow in the future.

If you are a journalist your JOB is to understand and insert yourself into the flow of information.

One could argue that this is one reason why journalism and the media are so important. They set the agenda for local and national conversations. It gives us space and a reason to face ourselves, confront topics and converse with our neighbors. With the help of the Whitman Institute sponsorship Spot.Us is exploring how we talk about the news with our colleagues, what we discuss and why. The results of our last 200 person survey are below with some analysis. See the first Whitman Institute survey here.

Our next Whitman Institute survey just went up. You can go to Spot.Us and click “free credits” on any pitch. Taking the survey not only informs what we know about how you think/use the media – but funds an the independent reporting project of your choice!

As always it’s important to note that Spot.Us is not a polling company, but these do represent real answers from unique individuals.

Our first question was just to see if indeed people do discuss the news with family, co-workers or friends. Only 1 percent of respondents didn’t discuss the news at all. The majority (57 percent) of responders say they discussed the news on a daily basis with another 25 percent saying they discussed the news “a few times” in the past week.

The next question we wanted to ask was about the nature of the conversation. So much of our political discourse is polarized. We wanted to get a sense of whether or not that was the case in our every day lives too. Do conversations around the news get too heated? Or are we simply talking with folks we already agree with avoiding any debate or confrontation?

According to the survey results about half of the conversations we have on the news are “a back and forth conversation, cordial with disagreement.” Only 5 percent report having a heated debate with another 32 percent saying that the conversations were cordial because “we saw eye-to-eye on the issues.”

There are many ways to interpret these results. That half of our conversations are cordial with disagreements does show a strong contrast with what we are presented on television, where almost every conversation turns into a shouting match. And yet roughly a third of our conversations are with people that we already agree with. While I think we could use less polarized bickering on cable television, perhaps we could use some more heated (but healthy) debate in our everyday conversations?

All bar graph results mean that individuals could choose multiple answers. This means the total possible number of ‘votes’ was out of 200 instead of a percentage in a pie chart of 100.

When we asked individuals who they discussed the news with, it turns out that the winner was “friends.” Nearly 80 percent of all respondents or 157 individuals discussed the news with their friends in the past week. Family was a close second and only 94 individuals (nearly 50 percent) discussed the news with co-workers.

Something the graph below doesn’t show was where answers overlapped. Almost all individuals that discussed the news with co-workers also discussed it with friends. If you discussed the news with family you were more likely to also discuss it with your friends than co-workers. It was these two predispositions that allowed “friends” to come out as the most popular answer.  Only 25 percent of respondents felt comfortable discussing the news with all three types equally.

Funny enough the most popular “other” example that was given was – strangers; either in person (on a bus) or online.

The survey results here were surprising because it goes against everything we hear about news preferences online. Instead of niche news (topical, including sports) being the most popular, it was the least. Perhaps because Spot.Us is a self-selecting community the most popular news to discuss was national and local news with international news following right behind. This could also be because during the survey the debt ceiling news was reaching a fever pitch and international markets are in turmoil.

The immediate positive aspect of this pitch is obvious. When discussing the news we feel stimulated. But because these answers are not mutually exclusive we also feel anxious, depressed and invigorated almost equally.

A total of 41 individuals or 20 percent of respondents said they only felt either depressed or anxious. Meanwhile 90 individuals or 45 percent felt either only invigorated or stimulated (51 individuals ONLY felt stimulated).

The news we discussed was overwhelmingly abstracted from our deeply personal lives. The vast majority of the news we discussed impacts us in a broad sense ie: the national debt ceiling. But some of the open ended answers about what news we were reading shed light on this further. The 20 percent who discussed the news that did have a direct impact on their life felt a deep connection to the stories whether it was Carmageddon in Los Angeles or a local shooting.

OPEN ANSWERS: “Tell us about the story you discussed.”

These are the full answers about news stories discussed by Spot.Us community members, but their names have been withheld.

What DON’T I discuss? I’m obsessed with the Murdoch takedown. OBSESSED. I have discussed the debt crisis, local crime, the governor of my state and what he’s up to…I’m a big chatty newsy person. I love to talk about all the news all the time.

Carmageddon, obviously. Even my parents back in Boston had heard about it. I was actually kind of amazed it was national news, so we talked about that.

The women’s Soccer World Cup, the News of the World scandal,and a local issue concerning the merger of my city’s CVB and Office of Cultural Affairs

Michele Bachman and the catholic church

Schools, government (FL), peak oil, doom

Rupert Murdoch’s impact on politics in the UK and the US. The US national debt. Republicans.

Discussing impact of sunspot activity, global weirding + local weather

Political wrangling going on in Washinggton.

One story was about Seattle City Council passing an ordinance allowing food trucks on streets and not just private lots. Another was about the Women’s World Cup final game. Another was about the Seattle Sounders match.

Too many to mention. one that still stands out is a radio show on the situation of human trafficking, and the apathy of many that goes along. also the bay area seems to be an international hub of sorts for such illegal activities. who knows about such?

Police shooting of 19-year-old boy by SF Muni police.

I discuss news stories at least twice a day. Usually more often. This particular news story is regarding the fires in the Southwest, specifically New Mexico. Our drought. And the causes of the fires and drought = climate change.
Discussing news is helpful….it informs life and makes us better, engaged people.

With that in mind, I wanted to write a practical post. Five simple things that increase my productivity. Before the list begins a disclaimer: The only way to increase productivity is to do things. You can be equipped with every tool out there – but if you don’t focus it won’t help. As my friend Cyrus says “Being a good writer is 3% talent, and 97% not being distracted by the Internet.”

What tools save you time?

(As an added bonus example – this image provided via Tagaroo. Waste time looking for good photos, try Tagaroo!)

Text Expander

Do you write a lot of emails? Do many of them have the same elements? Do you run an organization and sometimes you need to do reach out to various people but you don’t want to mass email people (lame?). Do you write a lot of html and would love some shortcuts? Check out Text Expander. This original tool came to me via Amy Gahran, bless her soul,  and has been a life saver. It even keeps track of how much it estimates its saved you. To date for me: 92 hours (estimating that I type 400 characters a minute). It also has an auto-correct tool that fixes common typos. Lucky for me, my typos are never common.

Jing

This tool comes via Kara Andrade and Erik Sundelof. Jing is a screencast tool which is incredibly useful if you work with a remote team building and managing a website. If you’ve ever had a phone conversation with a web developer about a bug,  you’ll know that communication is hard. You’ll ask them to get on the computer so they can see what you see. But you are never 100% sure if what you are saying translates. All that goes away with Jing. Now take a quick screencast of what you are seeing and upload that to screencast automatically and then share the link. Boom – you and your team are on the same page. No need to schedule a conference call, no worries about miscommunication.

xPad

It is as cool as it sounds. The xPad is the ultimate notebook. Do you take notes on your computer? Do you use Microsoft Word to save those notes. If so – please stop reading this right now and slap yourself. Microsoft Word is a horrible way to take notes. It is clunky, big files, slow to open, slow to close and worse yet – doesn’t easily transfer online (people that cut and paste word documents into a WYSWIG editor are a pet peeve.) For a long time I just had an internal system of using TextEdit (Rich Text Documents). It worked okay. I’d keep one blank document open at all times (note taking) and save important ones. Luckily Joy Mayer, a fellows Missouri Reynolds Fellow told me about xPad. I have not needed to open up Text Edit since. The xPax stays open. I can create a new internal document in seconds. Rename it whenever, delete it and flip between notes in a breeze. If you have tons of Word documents or any other kind of documents clouding your desktop this is your solution.

Rapportive

This little plugin helps you know who you are talking to. If you are like me and you get an email from somebody new one of the first things you do is Google them to get the details. Rapportive does that for you. Right there in your inbox they’ll search for related social media accounts on LinkedIn, facebook, Twitter, and more. Forget searching to find out who this person is – it’s already in front of you. Related but not as practical: Gist.

Grease Monkey

Grease Monkey is the script that fathered all scripts. First: If you don’t use Firefox, stop reading this and slap yourself.

If you do use Firefox, are you using it to its full potential? Maybe not. Download Grease Monkey and then search through the seemingly endless add-ons. The important thing here is not to get lost in the sea of possibilities. Instead think about a problem you already have in your browsing experience. Maybe you want a better way to find the latest news. Then go to Grease Monkey and search news. You can see already there are more tools here than one person could use. But – I promise that picking the right one will save you a TON of time and energy.

So there you have it – these are just five tools that I use on a regular basis that have probably saved me countless hours. More than 92 at least

I do not think we hold our tech blogs to high enough standards. I think we let them take us on cult of personality rides and we get infatuated. Today I am a total back-seat tech-writer. As I read various tech blogs I find myself wondering how I would cover issues. I have lots of praise but also constructive criticism for the current tech blog scene. Since people often ask me what sites I follow to stay on top of things I figure a post like this will let me rant and answer that question.

Disclaimer: I’m focusing on organizations that cover technology. If this list were to include tech pundits or individuals (Kottke, Laughing Squid, Rough Type, etc) it would be much longer. I am also excluding sites that cover the cross-section of technology and media (Nieman, MediaShift, Buzzmachine, PaidContent, etc). This is not an exhaustive list. It’s tech-blogging 101 for those that need to be introduced.

So without further adieu – my list of tech blogs and their vibes.

Read Write Web

Right now Read Write Web is the New York Times of tech blogs. This isn’t just because they have a syndication deal (which they do) but because RWW provides a sense of analysis that other tech blogs don’t. I recently met Richard MacManus, the founder of RWW, who confirmed that their emphasis was on context rather than speed. This may seem counter-intuitive in a world of speed and constant updates, but it is what separates them and as a reader I appreciate it and trust them more than most tech blogs because of it.

Wired

It’s hard for me to objectively describe Wired. Not that objectivity is the goal, but I worked there for the first year out of college and it is still one of the best jobs I’ve ever had. As a result, thinking about Wired gives me warm fuzzies and I know first hand how much love and attention goes into the editorial process. As a result this is a go-to source of tech news. It is for many people because Wired is one of the first sources of tech news. For some, like my father, Wired isn’t a news source – it’s a cultural touchstone. It represents the tech revolution itself.

TechCrunch

TechCrunch is guilty of the cult-of-personality. You cannot separate organization from Mike Arrington who has shaped it from the ground up. This is not a bad thing. Mike has a strong personality and he knows it. His importeur is all over TechCrunch. So whenever I read TechCrunch (which from what I can tell values speed over context) I have to put on my Mike Arrington goggle filters. That said, TechCrunch pushes boundaries in reporting and that is why I love following them. They have mastered the art of respectfully changing an article based on reader comments. At one point they even tried to kill embargoes for their site. I am sure it didn’t work – bu that kind of radical thinking shows the role that techblogs can have and that’s why TechCrunch is notable. They are not afraid to push boundaries while covering technology.

Mashable (Updated from Comments)

The truth of the matter is – I love some of the PEOPLE at Mashable (Vadim Lavrusik and Tamar, etc) but I DON’T like Mashable. In fact, it comes to mind as a tech blog who I wish would step it up.  First: In tone and ethos it comes off way too much like MTV. Everything is very flashy, glitzy, etc. It makes an old man like me have seizures. More important: They are a tech company disguised as a news site. They write how-to’s, lists, digg-bait, etc. As a result they have a dog in the tech-race that they are covering. I think all tech blogs have a dog in the race to some extent – but none more obviously so than Mashable IMHO. I like their content when I’m in a certain mood. But if I’m not in that mood – it can actually irk me.

Venture Beat

I like Venture Beat because it is straight and to the point. Follow the money. This is the Wall Street Journal of tech blogs. I’ve known a few writers who have worked here over the years and I think they do a good job of following the industry. It’s also interesting to note that like GigaOm this blog was started by a tech reporter from a newspaper. Today in journalism we talk about entrepreneurialism and personal branding. These tech blogs are living proof of why.

GigaOm

Similar to Venture Beat this is an example of a tech reporter who owned his beat and turned that into owning his own media company. That is admirale and has a larger lesson for the journalism industry. In fact, GigaOm is becoming more and more of a general purpose destination. They cover everything from the environment and media, but with a tech spin. They also do a good job of letting you know the individual writers including Mathew Ingram (one of my all time favs).

Engadget/Gizmodo

In truth I am not an Engadget or Gizmodo fan. My interest in technology is rarely gadgets or gizmos. These two sites occupy the same space in my mind. The recent iPhone 4 kerfuffle was notable. I think these blogs tend to be caught up in shiny new play things and that is not interesting. It’s straight consumerism. They might as well be printing catalogs for Apple and other companies. Just my anti-consumerism two cents.

Business Insider

I’ve been following Business Insider back when it was called Silicon Alley Insider. One of the defining things about this site is it’s New York attitude and approach to covering technology. They are distinctively not caught up in the hype machine that can be silicon valley. I love this about them. They also BLEW ME AWAY with their investigation on Facebook. Talk about holding a company’s feet to the fire.

Lifehacker

I love this site for thinking out of the box. This shows you how technology can improve your life on a very practical level. Whereas Venture Beat is all about following the money, this site is about following the practical uses for your everyday life. For that, it is invaluable.

Search Engine Land

I’m including this as an example of a niche tech site. There are tons of these (some of the best cover specific sites like All Facebook). They are fantastic when you want to dive deep. Search is arguably the most important online industry and this is a great blog to follow it. I also recommend John Battele’s Searchblog if you want the go-to independent blogger source and for many of these niche topics the independent blogger who covers the beat is just as insightful as the niche organization.

Silicon Valley Watcher

The last on the list Silicon Valley Watcher does an amazing job of staying very personal (Tom Foremski) but with an air of professionalism. It’s just a good read. No final analogy (although I think Tom’s time at the Financial Times is reflected in this blog.

So what is your favorite source of tech news and how do you describe it?

——–

As many a reader know, I love drawn out analogies. Here are some of my favorites.

• Journalism bloggers as musicians
• The Community Dream Team: Tech versions of the 1994 Basketball Dream Team. Lawrence Lessig was the Larry Bird of my Internet Dream Team.
• Cities as relatives (I will soon include Columbia Missouri to the list of “my three cities”).
• Community journalism as baseball and as a social gathering.

That said – I will occasionally ask for favors back. When Seth presented the result of his dissertation at the International Symposium in Austin I was blown away. Partly because it felt as though he was reading my mind (particularly from slide #6 and on). So I asked Seth for his slides. He one-upped me by adding audio to it – so I don’t have to describe a thing. Awesome. Also see his blog post.

Public Media Collaborative.

• Our Wiki
• Our Facebook

What has grown out of a dinner with some social media friends has turned into an adhoc service organization. While I already have my plate full – this has been a side project I am growing more passionate about. It helps Spot.Us (I’m not 100% altruistic here) but I genuinely believe in being part of a larger community. Journalism is a big part of my life. But so is the Bay Area. So are civic organizations. So are people who want to be empowered. And that’s why I think the Public Media Collaborative has grown, very naturally, from 5-6 of us having dinner talking about doing good – to a growing force able to organize the following.

We are holding events October 23rd and 24th.

• Social Media for Social Action: October 23rd
• East Bay (Beast Bay) Blogger camp: October 24th

What is a Beast Blogger Camp?

Check out a video fo the first one Spot.Us organized

This next Beast Blogger camp will be even better with support from the Knight Digital Media Center at U.C. Berkeley who will provide training in.

• SoundSlides
• Google Tools
• SEO tips and tricks

We will also have conversations about WordPress, blogging for business, blogging for fun and more.

Want to know more about PMC?

Check out this video of Susan Mernit taken by George Kelly.

(video courtesy of PMC

If you are already a web-head it won’t be anything new. I think this video is more to convert folk. But even if you are already a convert to the idea of collaboration on the web – this is an inspiring video.

Us Now from Banyak Films on Vimeo.

I’m not trying to prescribe anything – just sharing how I use these words because it helps me think through what is happening online and where Spot.Us stands (look for the joke at the end of this LONG post).

That 2007 post landed me a small freelance piece for the Press Gazette where I wrote a cleaner version: “Time Citizen Journalism Pulled its Act together.” As noted – the original post was inspired by  Steve Outing’s Poynter post 11 Layers of Citizen Journalism.

It is time to revisit these definitions, update them, and add explanations to what I mean when I use certain phrases like “journalism is a process, not a product.” In reading through all of them – I hope one can see how they play off each other in my mind.

My definitions and updates for

• citizen journalism
• Stand-alone Journalism
• Pro-am Journalism
• Networked Journalism (including “Distributed Reporting.”)
• Open Source Journalism (including the re-release of stories and content sharing).

And I try and explain what I mean when I say….

• Journalism is a process – not a product.
• Collaboration is Queen
• Media is an act of community organizing
• Community Funded Reporting
• Journalism will survive the death of its institutions.
• Hyper-local
• Computational Journalism
• New Media skill set
• New Media mind set
• Journalism (yes… I get that bold)
• Professional journalism

“citizen journalism”

Update: Boss Rosen defines citizen journalism as such: “When the people formerly known as the audience employ the press tools in their possession to inform one another.” The reason I wrote my initial post in 2007 was because this definition (although not articulated at the time – it was in the ether) is too broad. It defines a class of acts. What he is describing is Citizen Journalism with a capital “C.” I tend to avoid this term because it clashes with “citizen journalism” which I describe below, as an act that happens under very specific circumstances. I tend to refer to the class of acts as “Participatory journalism.” Here’s why.

Old def of citizen journalism: This is the catch phrase that started it all. “Citizen journalism” with a capital “C” refers to an entire class of terms, and hence some of the confusion. If we are talking about a single act of “citizen journalism,” we most often are discussing an individual, who is not a paid journalist, who bares witness to a newsworthy event and broadcasts it. Acts of citizen journalism in this sense happen by mere coincidence. People are everywhere and when disaster strikes, someone usually has a camera.

Examples: Oscar Grant shooting, London train bombings, terror attacks in India.

“Stand-alone journalism”

In contrast to citizen journalism, this is when the individual isn’t reporting out of happenstance. The reporter, who is not acting as a “professional,” (see below) made a conscious choice to go out and report on a topic. This term was coined by Chris Nolan at Spot-on.com. Many people still refer this to fall under the class of “Citizen Journalism (with a big C) but that starts to confuse citizen journalism acts that are happenstance. I call this “stand-alone journalism” which is under the class of “Participatory Journalism” – but it is not “professional.”

Update: These might also be called “Placebloggers.” One of my favorite stand alone journalists in San Francisco is N Judah Chronicles. To my knowledge this blog is a passionate hobby, not part of the author’s profession.

“Pro-am Journalism”

The most basic form of “Citizen journalism” that news organizations tend to engage in is when professional and amateur journalists work together. It occurs through basic comments on an article – when those comments add extra information or new views that the original writer left out. These comments can be an incredible source of value to a story and are very easy to invoke. This is the basis of “pro-am journalism” but it extends to include more (below). Reporters need to learn the art of community management; and acknowledge that they now have a nuanced relationship with readers and must repeat, every day, “my readers know more than I do.”

“Network journalism”

Although it hasn’t reached its full potential, the idea is to organize groups of people through the internet to work on a single story. Like stand-alone journalism, it is a conscious decision, but large groups, rather than a lone reporter, do the work. Networked journalism rests its fate on two principles: the “wisdom of crowds” – the idea that collectives can be more intelligent than individuals – and “distributed reporting.”

Update: This is often espoused by Jeff Jarvis and I believe it is what Dave Winer often describes in his posts on the future of news. Almost two years later I still don’t think network journalism has reached its full potential, which is to say, we can expect more and better coverage in this fashion. I think what is needed are mature platforms that can allow groups of like-minded individuals to find each other and do “distributed reporting.”

Distributed Reporting

The art of organizing an online work flow, so that volunteers are efficient and happy to donate time to commit acts of journalism that in aggregate helps produce news. In distributed reporting – the work load is spread out. This is contrasted nicely with “community funding” where the cost of reporting is distributed.

“Open source journalism”

Like networked journalism, these projects are collaborative. They have multiple points or “sources” of information. But open source journalism adds an important element. Either a) the re-release of stories or b) sharing information among competitors. These factors make a project “open.”

Update: I think we are starting to see the emergence of this. ProPublica, the new Huffington Post investigative arm and Spot.Us all make content available to be republished. What happens when everyone starts doing it? We focus less on “scoops” and more on collaboration.

The re-release of stories

In networked journalism, people work in collaboration on a single story. In open source, they work together on a story that is constantly refined and republished in public. Imagine a journalist who releases a story to the public. Then, using participatory or networked journalism, more reporting and information is added and the story is reworked and republished. This method can produce amazing results. Covering an election, you’ll need a definitive story once the results are in. An open source story will feel very anti-climatic. But covering development in a community, the story will probably last several months, lending itself to new versions.

Update: Not unlike this blog post where I started defining these terms for myself. This would be the third release of it.

Sharing information:

While this has major potential, it has yet to be realized. Imagine 100 newspapers covering the same topic: “Local effects of global warming.” Each paper covers its own neighborhood, gathering the same information, local bird migration, average temperatures and more. Each paper would have a story serving its local readers, but if it shared that information with the other 99 papers, they could create a national view of global warming. You lose the scoop, but you get to be part of a story that is greater than that which your single paper could ever produce.

Update: See “What happens to my recyclables” on Spot.Us. Now imagine we raise $4,000 instead of $400. We hire ten reporters to do this story in ten different cities – all sharing their methods and ideas, so the finishes package is better than the sum of its parts. Spot.Us in this sense becomes the SourceForge of how to do this story. I also think that the move of ProPublica and Huffington Post to share their investigative work with newspapers is incredibly interesting and, not to pat myself on the back, validates a lot of my early thoughts on sharing of content. Scoops have the half life of a link. Being the first one to cover a story is not nearly as cool as being one of ten or more organizations to all cover a story together.

Phrases

Journalism is a process – not a product.

Newspapers, TV shows and magazines are products that contain journalism. But journalism is a process. It is a series of acts one does to collect, filter, distribute and add value to information. Journalism is never finished. Even when you package a story in a newspaper – the story is not done. Stories are never open and shut cases. They develop over time and this can be reflected in the re-release of stories.

Collaboration is Queen

Analogy is of a chess board: Content is king (the most important) but collaboration is queen (the most powerful.

Extending the analogy

• Rooks are technology (I love Casteling as a first move)
• Bishops are your project managers – either technology or community.
• Knights are your editors/reporters
• Pawns are your community (and can become queens if you get them to the other side of the board)

Media is an act of community organizing

I missed the 60′s – but I hear they were awesome! When you wanted to make a change back then, you’d get a bunch of people together and picket something. That still occurs.

But a YouTube video can be the modern march. Many YouTube videos are made with this in mind. It is media – but it is also a force of change. Before you whine “that it is all bias and unfair,” consider a well accepted motto, that journalism is supposed to “comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.” Also – get off your high-horse.

Community Funded Reporting

Distributing the cost of hiring a journalist across many different people. This can be contrasted with distributing reporting – where the work load is spread out. It is a new business model. Nothing else about the journalism changes. It is contrasted with micro-payments which are related but distinct because there is transparency and control about where the money goes.

“Journalism will survive the death of its institutions.”

One of my all time favorite quotes. The rallying cry should be “save journalism” not “save newspapers.” It is a mistake to conflate the two. Journalism is a process (see above) that can and will survive the death of its institutions.

Hyperlocal

I hate the word “hyperlocal.” I don’t know why “local” isn’t enough. For me hyperlocal is a word used to avoid having to say “community.” We should be doing “community journalism” not “hyperlocal.” When I read hyperlocal – I often replace it with “community” and don’t need to skip a beat.

Computational Journalism

An evolution of NICAR or database journalism. The world is filled with data sets. Computational journalism turns these data sets into something digestible. Think info graphics. More than that, however, the data becomes interactive. One can easily slice and dice the data through their computer to find the information that is most relevant to them. Adrian Holovaty‘s work are great examples as are Matt Waite‘s and Derek Willis. Having the programming skills of a second grader (maybe today that isn’t so bad now) this is probably the field of journalism I am least involved in, but I respect it greatly. There is also something to be said for the name: I believe Adrian has said he doesn’t like the term “computational journalism.” But I go back to the disclaimer at the top – these are the terms/defintions I use. I am not prescribing them to anyone.

New Media skill set

This is now 1/2 of what journalist schools are repeating over and over again. We need to teach “new media skill set….” For me this boils down to digital storytelling. In Greek times oration was the only way to tell a story. And some individuals got really good at it. Jouranalism consists of stories and ideas. Telling a good story is an art and a new media skill set means being able to tell stories well online. This includes photos, video, audio and more.

New Media mind set

The other half of what journalist schools say they need to teach “… and new media mind set.” Too often, however, I get the impression that journalism professors think that teaching a “new media mind set” is to make sure students keep in mind they need a “new media skill set.” The two are very different. A new media mind set means engaging with readers. It means using tools like blogs, twitter, social news sites like Digg or Reddit, blip.tv and other free networking sites not just to tell your story (skill set) but to engage with communities on their level.

Journalism

Journalism is a process: Collecting information, filtering information and distributing information. Often this consists of analyzing information to add value or meaning ie: with all this information here’s why it is important. It also includes caveats: the information must be accurate and throroughly researched. Through this process journalism takes the form of stories and ideas.

Professional Journalism

“When somebody makes money doing journalism.” Analogy – if somebody plays guitar on the streets for money – they are professional musicians (just not very successful ones). Doing something with the intent and expectation of being paid makes one a professional journalist.

Simple, right? So why did I feel the need to define it as such?

Occasionally I hear people say “professional journalism” when they mean “good journalism” because they equate the two. They say: “Yes but this is ‘professional journalism.’” Note: citizen journalism can be good and professional journalism can be bad.

I love the folks at Public-Press, so I hope they don’t mind me using them as an example.

I often hear the Public-Press refer to what they do as “professional journalism.” At the same time, however, the Public-Press, except for one individual, is run by volunteers. Most of the content they publish is produced for free or is from Spot.Us. Since Spot.Us’ content is paid – I would argue that this is the “professional” content they have. That said – I think A LOT of their content is good. Either way an ex-journalist who is volunteering at the Public-Press is now a stand-alone journalist. And guess what – there is nothing wrong with that. Don’t ghettoize it!

People also refer to Spot.Us as “citizen journalism.” Spot.Us is, without a doubt, participatory. I wouldn’t have it any other way. But the content we produce in the end is made by reporters who get paid. So the finished work is not citizen journalism – although citizens are involved in every step of the process.

Social Media Expert

A jackass that is trying to get hired so they can sell you snake oil.

So how do I describe Spot.Us? Simple….

“Spot.Us is participatory journalism that believes journalism is a process not a product, funded through community organizing efforts. We strive to use networked practices and open source principles, enabling stand-alone journalists to reach further and become professionals, pushing content sharing among news organizations so that collaboration can produce powerful stories of distributed reporting. The endeavor is run by David Cohn who is a social media expert.

I need to work on my elevator pitch