Jeff Jarvis often encourages his readers to think about news in the Web ecosystem as a “process,” rather than as a product. Commenting on the preview of Google Wave, Jarvis expands on that idea:
In Wave, I see more than a new generation of email cum wikis cum Twitter cum groupware. Because it can feed blog and web pages and Twitter, I see a new way to create content, collaborative and live. I see a new way to make news.
Imagine a team of reporters – together with witnesses on the scene – able to contribute photos and news to the same Wave (formerly known as a story or a page). One can write up what is known; a witness can add facts from the scene and photos; an editor or reader can ask questions. And it is all contained under a single address – a permalink for the story – that is constantly updated from a collaborative team.
Jarvis’ point about the collaborative nature of future news is echoed by Paul Gillin, writing for Newspaper Death Watch:
Posted in citizen journalism, civic journalism, crowdsourcing, investigative journalism, news industry, Online communities, Online journalism
Tagged BuzzMachine, Help Me Investigate, Jeff Jarvis, Newspaper Death Watch, Online Journalism Blog, Paul Bradshaw, Paul Gillin, The Guardian
Guest columnist David Scharfenberg suggested in a column for Boston.com that the government should set aside $100 million for a journalism fund to:
seed low-cost, Internet-based news operations in cities large and small – combining vigorous, professional reporting with blogging, video posts, citizen journalism, and aggregation of stories from other sources.
I personally think competition and innovation is the best solution to the industry’s well-documented woes.
Posted in media criticism, news industry, Online journalism
Tagged Boston Globe, Boston.com, David Scharfenberg, journalism fund, liberal agenda, media bias, New York Times, news industry, Newspaper Death Watch, Newspaper industry
Recovering Journalist takes the New York Times Co. to task for not defending established linking practices. Commenter Dave Mastio makes the interesting point that the New York Times Co. settled in order to avoiding winning the case and establishing a precedent that would have allowed other sites to similarly aggregate Times content.
But in Nieman Journalism Lab’s wrap-up of the case, Dan Kennedy suggests that the Times may have had a fight on its hands had the case gone to court:
Posted in copyright, ethics, fair use, headlines, journalism ethics, media criticism, Online journalism
Tagged Dan Kennedy, fair use, GateHouse Media, journalism ethics, Media Nation, New York Times, Newspaper Death Watch, Nieman Journalism Lab, Recovering Journalist