{"id":2308,"date":"2010-04-29T22:13:42","date_gmt":"2010-04-30T05:13:42","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/yulelog\/?p=2308"},"modified":"2010-04-29T23:21:03","modified_gmt":"2010-04-30T06:21:03","slug":"some-resources-for-victorias-msm","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/yulelog\/2010\/04\/29\/some-resources-for-victorias-msm\/","title":{"rendered":"Some resources for Victoria’s MSM"},"content":{"rendered":"

Someone named Adrian (not sure if it’s the same Adrian<\/a>, different email address) just …um, remarked that I haven’t yet responded to the comments thread on my No policy …no strategy, either<\/a> post.<\/p>\n

Ah yes, newspaper and MSM people get to complain about being understaffed, but we bloggers are expected to be on 24\/7\/365 (for free!)…? \ud83d\ude09<\/p>\n

As I mentioned in yesterday’s brief post, my internet went down around 3pm. It didn’t come back till this afternoon, so my usual method of snatching a moment here and a moment there to go online, to listen in, to read, and even to write was down the tubes for nearly 24 hours. I don’t own a smart phone (mobile telephony – drool, one day, one day!), nor do I ever seem to have the luxury of taking myself off to a third place<\/a> to be alone and work in peace – my first and second places are one and the same, and they get crazy. When I go out, it’s for meetings (as happened today) or to walk the dog. So, if I can’t glean<\/a> a minute inbetween other minutes, it seems it doesn’t get done.<\/p>\n

But let’s see if I can now expand into some sort of follow-up on No policy …no strategy, either<\/a>.<\/p>\n

First: I was very impressed by Bryan Capistrano’s comments, who commented initially<\/a> via Twitter<\/a> and then on my comments board<\/a>. Among other things, he noted:<\/p>\n

I\u2019ve mentioned that radio stations can sometimes get into an easy habit of talking AT a listener and not TO a listener. The social media that we use has allowed us on a number of occasions to be an ear and not just a mouth (I thought of that while walking back to my car last night and kicked myself for not saying it)! If that\u2019s not considered a strategy, I would at least consider it a good starting point.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This is of course one of the basic tenets of markets are conversations<\/a> (see Cluetrain Manifesto<\/a>), a kind of blueprint (now 10 years old) for what new media (and new business) is all about. I would really really encourage local media people to familiarize themselves with the Cluetrain’s theses. Of course you don’t talk AT people, you have conversations. This means you can forget about hierarchies, too.<\/p>\n

Bryan gets this when he writes,”I\u2019m a firm believer that the only way to learn about something is by looking at it from all sides.” I would argue that Adrian doesn’t quite get this. In his comment, he writes, “The notion that everything in daily papers is suddenly a bunch of bunk seems to be rather overstated.” That’s an unnecessarily defensive statement since neither I nor anyone else on the comments board said “everything in daily papers is …a bunch of bunk…”<\/p>\n

After all, a cardinal rule of conversation is that you also learn to listen.<\/p>\n

\"\"Bryan was one of the panelists, along with Dana Hutchings, who I thought would have the best overview of the managerial\/ revenue questions since his station isn’t owned by some corporate overlord(s). (I think his station is independent – I could be wrong; happy to be corrected if so.) In his comment, Bryan wrote, “social media has in no way affected our medium\u2019s revenue stream.” I wish I knew more about the radio business, but I don’t. TV and radio are two mediums I rarely pay attention to (I don’t have cable, so no TV for me; and I listen to radio once in a blue moon – say, while driving, which means for ~10 minutes at a time). But it’s obvious from Dana Hutchings’s CHEK TV saga and also clear from Bryan Capistrano’s comments that these two do have incredible potential for steering their own destiny. I also wonder if it’s a condition specific to Victoria (which still has a deep digital divide) that revenue streams have not been affected.<\/p>\n

Bryan and Deb (not sure if I should note which organization she’s from since she didn’t provide that link in her comment) noted that my body language further into the evening spoke volumes – and yes, while I was initially intrigued by what people were saying, I grew more impatient as the panelists began to respond to questions from the audience.<\/p>\n

If anyone was making this an “us and them” issue, it was, I’m sorry to say, the panelists themselves who grew increasingly defensive at being questioned.<\/p>\n

This was all really bizarre since, at the very end of the evening, Sarah Petrescu in particular sketched out a fairly detailed vision for what her ideal online news world should entail – and it’s one that absolutely includes the participatory “we.”<\/p>\n

But as long as the wall between editorial and management persists, any visions will exist in silos – and the editorial side stands to lose because, as newspapers die, their jobs will evaporate.<\/p>\n

Janice<\/a> commented:<\/p>\n

There was an interesting discussion on CBC radio the other day about the increase in citizen-generated news (and its credibility as real news!) on the internet and in SM, often around things that MSM deems un-newsworthy like re-zoning.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This speaks to revitalizing local coverage. We are terribly under-served right now: City Hall makes important decisions that directly affect us where we live, but we don’t hear about them. Social media can be way ahead of traditional media in being able to cover this (via that mobile telephony I don’t have, or if City Hall ever gets its act together to provide wi-fi), and the only way that traditional media can catch up is by including bloggers and others who will cover these news. It’s not rocket science.<\/p>\n

Overall, I’d say Tuesday’s meeting was a great start – props to Social Media Club Victoria<\/a> and Paul Holmes<\/a> for organizing the event. There should be more, there should be follow-ups.<\/p>\n

Speaking of follow-ups, did anyone see if the MSM that attended reported on its own participation? (I get my news online, and since the internet was down, I missed whatever was on. Give me a link if it was reported, thanks.)<\/p>\n

As I noted in my comments board yesterday, this is a huge topic – presumably this isn’t the end of it in Victoria, unless the MSM want to shut down the dialog and leave it to social \/ new media to sort things out. My follow-up, such as it is, is already too long, so let me wrap up with a list of what I’d call must-read resources.<\/p>\n

My favorite post is now nearly three years old: Ryan Sholin’s 10 obvious things about the future of newspapers you need to get through your head<\/a>. Must-read. Ryan posted a follow-up in 2008, 10 obvious things, one year later<\/a>, which reports on how well (or not) the industry has dealt with the points he raised in 2007. Pay special attention to #5 (I heard a few rumblings from some panelists that maybe charging for content is a good idea. It’s not. Don’t go there.) And of course those who think it’s an “us v. them” issue, puh-leeze: check out #7. The next point, #8, is really great, too. Just go read the whole thing<\/a> now.<\/p>\n

Clay Shirky<\/a>, the here-comes-everybody<\/a> (and long-tail<\/a>) guy. Read his The Collapse of Complex Business Models<\/a> (which I blogged about here<\/a>), and watch his superb presentation, Clay Shirky on Internet Issues Facing Newspapers (on Youtube)<\/a>. Shirky delivered this talk<\/a> at the Berkman Center for Internet and Society<\/a> in September 2009. Must-see.<\/p>\n

Dave Winer<\/a>, who writes about many things – often technology, and very often with a special focus on media. Check out his January 2010 entry, Why newspapers should host blogs<\/a>, for a glimpse of innovative thinking around both content and business models.<\/p>\n

Why should news orgs host blogs for members of their community? Because the business of news organizations is information. Gather it up, sort it, organize it, keep it current and do it again. People have a huge thirst for new information, more these days than ever and increasing all the time. It’s ridiculous that information-gathering orgs should be shrinking in a time where what they do is in such high demand. (source<\/a>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Pop in on his blog<\/a> or tweets<\/a> to see what he’s up to with Jay Rosen<\/a> of NYU<\/a>, too.<\/p>\n

Ok, that’s it for this evening. I’m deeply embarrassed that my list has only guys on it. I know there must be women I’m forgetting\/ leaving out. Maybe something for another follow-up …or comments?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This is a response to my Tuesday post on Victoria’s MSM and SM panel discussion, “No policy \u2026no strategy, either,” with a list of resources that local media might want to investigate.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":311,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1899,1651,103,1898,1002,1895,1418,115],"tags":[64764],"class_list":["post-2308","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-free_press","category-local_not_global","category-media","category-newspapers","category-social_critique","category-times_colonist","category-victoria","category-web","tag-resources"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/yulelog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2308","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/yulelog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/yulelog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/yulelog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/311"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/yulelog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2308"}],"version-history":[{"count":33,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/yulelog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2308\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2339,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/yulelog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2308\/revisions\/2339"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/yulelog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2308"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/yulelog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2308"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/yulelog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2308"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}