Blogging about blogs: we’re through the looking glass, people

Wrap your head around this one: this blog post is about a blog post about blogs.  (It’s also about newspapers and journalism, though, so rest easy.)

Writing for one of my favorite blogs, Mashable, Stan Schroeder takes on the common theme among “real” journalists that blogs muddy the water of news reporting.  Schroeder correctly points out that old models of news reporting simply can’t assemble all the information out there:

I’ll tell you what’s also news. When someone notices that Digg’s algorithm has changed and that tiny blogs will have a harder time getting on the front page. When someone finds a vulnerability in the iPhone’s latest firmware. When someone digs through Google Trends data and finds that no one is searching for “sex” anymore (yeah, that’s likely to happen).

I’ll also tell you who writes about these things: blogs. This is why blogs are popular, not because they’re rehashing news from big media publications, writing their opinions without contributing with facts. They’re popular because somewhere there’s a guy who took great interest in figuring out which airplane seats are the best to be seated in and he started a blog writing about it, and you cannot find this information in any major newspaper.

This is astute analysis.  I would add that blogs allow news segmentation – in other words, you can get information in the hands of the people to whom it is most relevant much easier.

After a softball game a few weeks ago, I had a conversation with a pair of fellow UMass journalism alums about Politico, which had just recently become profitable.  The shortstop, who works for an education newspaper, made the comment that media outlets like his and Politico were the future of media.  “News should be organized around a topic, not a geographic region,” he wisely said.

I discussed that theme from a different angle last week when talking to a group at the Leadership Institute’s Public Relations School about writing press releases.   The old ways of doing PR have changed; press releases have to be blog friendly – which may include having supporting information, like pictures and video, more available.  From an organizational perspective, this is good for two reasons.  First, it means more avenues for getting news out there.  Second – and more importantly – it means your target audience is easier to reach than ever.

For instance, if I’m releasing a new social networking platform, I’ll attract more  attention – at least, more of the right attention – if it’s covered on a blog like Mashable than if it’s on the front page of the New York Times.  The developing media landscape helps channel the flow of information.

And if you still feel like you need “professional” journalism… well, watch The Today Show every morning for a week, and tell me if you’re still as confident in “professional news.”

They’ll tell you what’s “fit to print”

Reader click-throughs have nothing to do with what stories make it to the New York Times online front page.  Much like the print edition of any newspaper, the editors determine what the most important stories of the day are and print those – which was a great model before everyone had all the information at their fingertips.  Now, the admission further diminishes the relevance of what used to be our nation’s newspaper of record.

Maybe news reporting will never be a “clear pane of glass,” showing readers the world’s events without bias, but that should be a goal.  And the decision about what to cover matters just as much as the tone of the coverage itself.  Basing the news on personal choice means less opportunity for bias to creep in.

The New York Times’s editorial decision to prioritze their news isn’t a political decision, though – it’s a business decision.  Unfortunately for them, it’s a business decision consistent with a one-way newsmedia – a concept which gets more dated every day.

Wait – Marion Barry actually has supporters?

Marion Barry’s defenders in his latest flap are accusing the Washington City Paper of racism.  The free weekly fronted their coverage of Barry’s latest public embarassment with a quote his former girlfriend apparently left on his voicemail: “You put me out in Denver ’cause I wouldn’t [perform a specific sex act which, if I wrote it, might get my blog flagged as ‘not safe for work’].”

It’s a legitimate question for people in neighborhoods to wonder why the City Paper – which again, is free and readily accessibly to kids – should use such vulgar language.  Barry and his minions have no beef.  They may complain that a white politician would not be covered the same way – as if late night talk show hosts hadn’t chewed up and spit out John Edwards, Mark Sanford, Bill Clinton, etc.  (Also: other politicians who don’t get this kind of coverage include the ones that don’t kick their mistresses out of hotel rooms for refusing to perform sex acts.)

If patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel, apparently racism is a close second-to-last. Those who would cry racism in this case forget that Barry’s latest public embarrassment is just that – his latest, and not his only, public embarassment.

It should be noted that charges that Barry was stalking his former girlfriend were dropped, and that the legal side of the dispute appears to be an overreaction to a private situation.  Given this, I was a little surprised that Barry didn’t resort to his tried and true defense when it comes to girlfriends who get him into hot water with the law.

No offense, but #$@& Alaska…

Sarah Palin may be the most scrutinized governor in the history of Alaska – a state that many Americans probably didn’t actually know was a real place up until last August.  Her resignation has only stoked that attention – and as Stanley Fish wrote in yesterday’s New York Times, media coverage refuses to take her words at face value that she feels the political system is broken despite the era “hope” and “change” that was supposed to be ushered in last January.

Here are some economic facts worth considering: Ben Stein, the former Nixon speechwriter who gained fame as a bit player in John Hughes movies in the 80s, commanded $30,000 per speech when he hit the college speaking circuit for Young America’s Foundation a few years back.  Palin could likely pull down $35,000-$40,000 a night speaking to packed college auditoriums.  In other words, she could probably pull down the annual $125,000 salary of an Alaskan governor inside of a week.  Not to mention that a wise PR director would make sure she had local TV and radio appearances.  And this doesn’t even take into account corporate speaking engagements, which she could probably charge double or triple for.

It all adds up to a lot more than most 45-year-olds earn on a yearly basis – especially 45-year-olds with five kids and a grandchild.  But there’s as many political reasons why her choice may be right for her as there are economic reasons. If you were Sarah Palin and had something to say about the state of the country, which would be a better platform for you – Governor of Alaska, a political office where you have constant legal challenges and criticisms, or giving speeches from coast to coast for a week or two a month, commenting on radio shows here and there, and writing books and opinion pieces?  And if she wanted to start her own think tank or 527, there are plenty of people who would line up to give her money – her already well-supported PAC reported a spike in fundraising after her resignation.

Given that her first exposure to national politics resulted in a steady drumbeat of opposing voices calling her a dolt at best and an unfit mother at worst, this may be the avenue to engage in the national debate on her own terms – and to reposition herself if she wants to make a future run for the Presidency (which, incidentally, only pays about $400,000).

“Politically speaking, if I die, I die.  So be it,” said Palin on Good Morning America – reflecting the candor which attracts her most dedicated followers.  She may not want to get back into the fray of electoral politics, but Palin is far from politically dead.

It’s Washington, so we can chalk this up to habit

The newspaper that taught us to “follow the money” is apparently doing the same: Politico reports that the Washington Post has advertised events to sell access to reporters and government officials.

This type of thing isn’t new – political debates and public forums often have media sponsors.  But those events have a purpose which serves the “public good” (and as journalists like to remind us, theirs is a profession where the pursuit of public good is vital).  The public good in exclusive “Salons” for the inside-the-Beltway intelligentsia is, shall we say, somewhat less clear.

New on YouTube: Citizen journalism and civic action

As many social networks as exist, YouTube still has the greatest potential for driving action for the simple reason that video is a powerful medium for communication – and short videos are even more so.

By offering a platform where people could host and share their videos easily, YouTube has had no small role in advancing the citizen journalism; if blogs gave everyone a printing press, YouTube has given everyone a TV news station.  YouTube is taking its role in this media re-alignment seriously, too, by creating a Reporters’ Center – a resource page with various videos to help people produce better news stories.

While some corners of the media landscape like to harp on bloggers and internet news as “unofficial” and “unprofessional”, this offers a real solution to those somewhat apt criticisms.  While there will always be muckrakers and yellow journalists in any media, these resources will help increase the amount of well-researched coverage through channels that news consumers are increasingly turning to.

Another new development from YouTube – that actually interests me a bit more personally – are the “call to action overlays” that launch today.  If you’re a YouTube advertiser, you can now run a link on your video that points viewers to another website.

Virally popular commercials – like the McDonald’s Filet-o-Fish commercial from this past Lent – can now link directly to the products they hawk.  But more importantly, political videos can do more  than simply raise awareness and frame issues.  Imaging the now-infamous “macaca video” with a link directing you to a page where you could contact then-Senator George Allen’s office.  (Of course, mass emails to Allen’s office may not be the most effective way to contact the Senator, but it would build a heck of a nice email list.)  Having videos that directly inspire action will make YouTube an advocacy tool for campaigns that may have, previously, only looked at it as a messaging tool.

Did you see that story on anything but Michael Jackson?

In the 17 hours or so since Michael Jackson’s death has been reported, an interesting rift has developed in online communications.  Apparently, some folks who have been discussing the Iran elections are upset that so many people are discussing celebrity deaths:

Twitter screen shot

This is probably a reflection of a few things.  First, there is an age gap in appreciating Michael Jackson’s career.  If you were born after 1985, your first memories of Michael Jackson are probably the world premiere of the “Black or White” video, and increasingly fragile physique, and a series of bizarre controversies and allegations of inappropriate conduct around young boys.  But it you are in the first generation to have MTV (back when it was ’round-the-clock music videos) or older, you remember that Michael Jackson almost single-glovedly invented the concept of pop music entertainment.

There’s also the fact that news, like politics, is local.  The loss of an iconic American pop culture figure is naturally going to mean more to Americans than election protests halfway around the world.  (And it’s worth noting that the folks who decide what news gets on TV have a role to play.  This week’s DC Metro crash probably wouldn’t have had the same coverage if it happened on a public transportation system for a city that doesn’t host a major bureau for every news organization in the known universe.)

They have a point, and it isn’t the only story getting swept under a rug.  Mark Sanford’s Argentinian dalliances have been muted outside South Carolina, and the Barack Obama health care debate is moving along on Capitol Hill in the background of the national consciousness.

The great thing about modern media is that, even if the “mainstream” press is obsessed with one story, an avid reader can seek out information from other sources.  And it for media analysis junkies, it provides a platform for discussions that simply don’t happen in one-way broadcast media.  In no other environment could the worlds of Michael Jackson and Iranian Fundamentalists collide in quite the same way.

If only there was some way to combine the issues…

Slowing down the media cycle

From 24-hour cable news to constantly-updated online news sources to social networks like Twitter and Facebook, it seems like our information comes at us in streams.  (And come to think of it, a fire hose may be a more appropriate metaphor than a stream.)  Conceptual artist Jonathan Keats is slowing the information cycle down on the cover of the most recent issue of Opium Magazine, where he has printed “the longest story ever told.”

Though the actual story is only nine words long, the printing process was done in such a way that each word will be revealed only as the ink fades – which, if their calculations are correct, will expose just one word every hundred years.

As if underscoring Keats’s point, my first reaction was to wonder if I could find a spoiler online.

Iranians can still Tweet – thanks, W!

Twitter

Maybe Hillary Clinton “wouldn’t know a twitter from a tweeter,” but Jared Cohen does.  He’s the 27-year-old State Department official who, realizing the need to keep lines of communication open among Iran’s protest movement, picked up the phone and asked Twitter to delay their scheduled service interruption.  He had established a relationship with Twitter executives at least since he organized a State Department envoy of new media crepresentatives earlier this year.

MTV lauded the foresight with the headline, “Iranians Keep Twittering Thanks To Young Obama Official.”  Unfortunately, MTV disproves its own headline with its story, revealing the shocking truth that Cohen was actually hired by Condoleeza Rice three years ago.

The guy hired by George W. Bush’s administration kept Iran talking using technology and new media.  The Obama appointee doesn’t even know the name of the technology.

The Futurama of Television

Fox is going back to the Futurama, ordering 26 new episodes of the quirky cartoon – which drew a niche audience for its first run, but seemed far to narrow in its appeal to stick on a network schedule. If that sounds familiar, it’s because this is the second time Fox has done this – the first time being for Family Guy.

Though it’s a hit now, seven years ago Family Guy was in and out of the Fox schedule, bounced around to different nights, and eventually drummed off the air.  But Family Guy found a new audience on cable, online (as college students and others with high speed connections downloaded episodes) and eventually on DVD.

Futurama followed the same path. After being bounced from Fox’s Sunday night animation block, it found a home on the Cartoon Network, grew into a hit, and was eventually brought back to network TV.

Does this mean TV networks need to change their models of success?  Obviously, both Family Guy and Futurama have a devoted audience, but took some time to find them.  And when they did, those audiences weren’t watching network TV during prime time – they were watching cable between 11:00 p.m. and 1:00 a.m.

Network TV is learning a lesson that marketers have – or should have – learned for decades: know where your audience is, and go there.