This is the P2PU Archive. If you want the current site, go to www.p2pu.org!
KMD Digital Journalism 2010
My recent threads
You haven't posted any discussions yet.
Recently updated threads
- Invite to Brazilian Digital Culture Forum Fri, 2010-10-15 00:44
- Student/Participant Presentation Preparation Fri, 2010-08-06 15:41
- July 25 High Quality Video of Seminar Wed, 2010-07-28 22:05
- Any participants willing to be interviewed? Tue, 2010-07-27 10:18
- 25th July IRC Log Mon, 2010-07-26 03:37
June 20 Seminar
Go back to: General discussion
Here's the link to the UStream recording of the seminar: http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/7798094
It's a discussion about the tools and a special presentation from Hiroko Tabuchi from the NYT Japan about the tools she uses and then a conversation about journalism in Japan. Mr. Hoshikawa, the ED of Greenpeace Japan joined us at the end of the seminar to talk about the current trial against the two Japanese Greenpeace activists.
Some links mentioned in the session:
http://www.chillingeffects.org/
http://wikileaks.org/
Hi
I thought Hiroko hit it spot on with the usefulness of Twitter for journos. It is a great tool and by monitoring trends and interacting with other people that use the site you can learn a lot.
However, one of things I found most interesting about the talk was what it told us about the NY Times: that it monitors the tweets of its journalists and expects them to maintain an "unbiased" stance.
Of course debates on bias etc. in the media are as old as the hills, but if the NYT has journalists on Twitter and a policy that they cannot state their beliefs on there, then it seems to me that something will have to give in the long term.
Twitter has obviously caused problems for media organizations, and the NYT policy is one possible solution. I don't feel it is the correct one though, as it restricts what people can write on there, and many readers are likely to pick up on this over time.
I think it would be possible to write a book on this, but for now I'd just like to field a question:
Is it correct for a media organization to ask its employees to be careful what they are writing on Twitter?
Hi
I thought Hiroko hit it spot on with the usefulness of Twitter for journos. It is a great tool and by monitoring trends and interacting with other people that use the site you can learn a lot.
However, one of things I found most interesting about the talk was what it told us about the NY Times: that it monitors the tweets of its journalists and expects them to maintain an "unbiased" stance.
Of course debates on bias etc. in the media are as old as the hills, but if the NYT has journalists on Twitter and a policy that they cannot state their beliefs on there, then it seems to me that something will have to give in the long term.
Twitter has obviously caused problems for media organizations, and the NYT policy is one possible solution. I don't feel it is the correct one though, as it restricts what people can write on there, and many readers are likely to pick up on this over time.
I think it would be possible to write a book on this, but for now I'd just like to field a question:
Is it correct for a media organization to ask its employees to be careful what they are writing on Twitter?
Hi Richard
it is a delicate and controversial question. I understand the media companies. They have that to be worried about your brand, your image.But the control must be careful, nothing that it flirts with the totalitarian censorship.Also I find that this question would be possible to write a book , a thick book.
I'm not sure if it's correct or not (or if you can even answer that question). Maybe it's the wrong question: perhaps "what does it mean for the publisher/media organization when they ask their employees to be careful of what they are writing on Twitter"?
In that case, for the Times I think that you're right in saying that consumers of their media a) know that they "censor" their employees/writers and b) that over time this may have an effect on how the public views them as a news source.
My preference is that Journalists have freedom at least in their personal accounts. This at least would help frame their "non-biased" articles and submissions published through their employer.
I wonder whether a distinction between "official" and "nonofficial" accounts may help. As a freelancer not tied to any organization I just say what I think (warts and all) on my Twitter account. This may harm me as much as "censoring" will in the long run, but I am just looking to make a Twitter stream that is an accurate portrayal of my personality.
Seems to me both methods come with risks, but I tend to side with telling the full truth over giving a partial view because of responsibility to employers.
Not sure I am doing the right thing though.
I did not know the Wiki leaks, I was sufficiently enthusiastic with it. Another tool that I had not given much attention was the Linkedin, a good net of contacts in the site can helps a lot, very useful.
The bias question on social media is quite intriguing, and case studies keep happening every day.
The David Weigel story from the Washington Post is the latest example.
At one point, it seemed enough to me to have separate a counts for personal use and work use, but new company policies still being formed and examples from other industries show the answers still aren't clear. Can a high-school teacher criticize students on her Facebook page? Not without possibly getting fired. Can a journalist have a private account and express political opinion? Not with the way trends are going in the U.S.
Is that right under employment law and ethically? That remains to be seen. Will it prevent some freelancers or others from deciding to work at organizations with restrictive policies? Possibly.