|
Tuesday, 29 July 2008 |
|
Ah well, it was only a matter of time, I suppose, until someone, somewhere started whingeing that the blogosphere is sexist and that women don't get the advantages that men do.
It appears that much of the "conversation" at the recent: BlogHer conference in San Francisco was of the "glass ceiling" which is holding women back from the success they deserve.
“Women get dismissed in ways that men don’t,” said Megan McArdle, an associate editor at The Atlantic Monthly... She added that women are taught not to be aggressive and analytical in the way that the political blogosphere demands, and are more likely to receive blog comments on how they look, rather than what they say.
er ... I'm sorry, I must have missed the point here: is there a men-only bloggers' forum somewhere? Is there something in the rules that means that womens' blogs carry less weight than mens'? Isn't the Web the great leveller - if the content is worthwhile then people will link to it and the site will get traffic.
Or is it part of the great military/industrial conspiracy? Answers on a postcard please...
Jumping the Shark
The big question they should have been asking at BlogHer was: is blogging about to jump the shark? For about a decade, the blogosphere was home to a bunch of clever, dedicated people (like my mate Tim Blair whose politics are appalling but whose posts are extremely funney. The suddenly it seemed to reach critical mass and everyone and his dog has a blog site. Including me. Admittedly, my dog only has a Facebook page, but it won't be long before he's growling away somewhere in cyberspace about organic lamb bones and how cats these days are pussies.
Duncan Riley now believes there are more than 50 million blogs wordwlde. He adds this caveat:
"it’s remiss of me not to note that a significant portion of the blogs are most likely abondoned or spam blogs, or that the figures are not likely to be represented in actual bloggers (multiple blogs per blogger), however I do this exercise from time to time as a means of noting that many in the mainstream media continue to under report the number of blogs in existence and the aim of this post is to articulate a more accurate figure."
Apparently the average number of blog posts is three after which people tend to get bored, tired or both.
Media in the Pub
Fair play to Fergus Pitt, he of the Fergle blog which has just poked its head above the parapet. He's running an event in Sydney on August 26, Media in the Pub - which combines two of my great interests. I'll be there and am hoping for a healthy turn out of people.
Maybe we are not all doomed after all
Have a look at this study of media use in Britain. Okay, so they are not in the same boat as Australia, well we have a bit of catching up to do - but according to the UK's Institute of Practise in Advertising, newspapers are holding up okay in spite of the onslaught from online.
"Ninety-one percent of adults prefer to read their national newspaper's print edition."
Doncha love the Brits? And adults, of course...
Media Watch - damned if you do, dozy if you don't
Normally I love Media Watch - it's one of the unmissable programs of the week and performs an invaluable public service in keeping the bastards honest. But they got a wee bit prune-faced about the Courier Mail's Nathan Richter who - it appears - was the only Australian snapper to get a useable shot of Jayant Patel en route back from LA.
But the real prize for pig-headed chutzpah goes to the Courier-Mail, whose photographer Nathan Richter managed to snap Patel in his seat while QF 176 was still on the apron in L.A. Richter was determined to send the pic to his newsroom before the flight took off.
Er .. correct me if I am wrong, but the job of a newspaper photographer is to get the shot and file it, however he or she can. In the past that has meant snappers putting themselves in harms way. How would nathan have looked if his editor had wanted to know why he didn't send in the shots and he said: "I was told not to by a flight attendant". Fair play to Qantas, too, but the story is of significant interest and the Courier scooped the field - with a little civil disobedience.
Author's note: I worked with David Fagan for some years and he has always struck me as a pretty fair-minded sort of a bloke and certainly not someone who would leave an employee hanging out to dry.
Save Our Subs - a progress report
Now 151 members of our international campaign to preserve the gentle art of sub-editing. We're attracted some quality (you know who you are) but a recent puff in the Guardian won't have gone amiss. And here - in a shameless attempt to get some healthy numbers to the site, is a link to the Giles Coren email that started all the kerfuffle...
toodles
SO here are some of my fave links from the past few days...
|
|
|
Bloggers have feelings too |
|
Thursday, 17 July 2008 |
|
Tons of fun at the Future of Media summit at Luna Park in Sydney on Tuesday which was organised by the peripatetic Ross Dawson who moderated discussion via the Web from Silicon Valley where he ahd assembled a posse of media types, new and old.
Here in Sydney it was quite a bunfight, especially in the bloggers corner, where an assault squad of new media types launched an all-out attack on the "dinosaurs". Jane Shultze took a particular shellacking. Crikey blogging correspondent Stilgherrian wrote this yesterday, which tickled my fancy, so I felt bound to defend the honour of our trade here.
In keeping with the subject matter, most of the blogging contingent were also tweeting away for all they were worth. Now we've all heard of continuous partial engagement - this may be proof that you don't really get anything properly that way.
nnnn
|
|
|
It's the content, stupid! |
|
Monday, 14 July 2008 |
|
The big news over the weekend was Guardian News and Media's Pounds 30million purchase of ContentNext, the parent company of tech and media blog, Paid Content.
Content Next is the brainchild of Manchester-born journalist, Rafat Ali, who according to this piece by Jemima Kiss, has followed the digital yellow brick road to fame and fortune since being laid off when Inside.com went under in 2001.
I'm an unashamed fan of how the Grauniad has gone about playing its part in the digital revolution: namely they are identifying opportunities to invest, rather than taking the slash-and-burn approach so beloved of some of our large Australian media companies (you know who you are).
GNM has already invested heavily in its US operation, launching Guardian America a couple of years ago, since when its penetration of the US market is at about 8 million readers a month. Not bad for a mid-market broadsheet that circulates around 350,000 copies in the UK.
But - and I'm busking here - I also think one of the key opportunities that GNM has identified is ContentNext's foothold in the burgeoning Indian market via contentsutra.com. Given the oft-quoted statistic that India is producing more English-language graduates than the rest of the world put together, it's probably a good market to be in.
As for GNM, they are more than happy as you'd expect.
"It’s a growing business. It’s very well regarded by very senior people in the industry it serves, including, incidentally, all the senior people here, and it’s in a space—media and technology—that we very firmly believe is central to our development going forward,” said Tim Brooks, GNM's managing director.
More from Brooks here . There's always something quiet sexy about counter-cyclical investment - and before we get carried away, let's not forget that GNM is owned by The Scott Trust, which has tended in the past to cushion the mastheads (well, the Grauniad at least) from the vagaries of nasty things like advertising downturns. Intriguingly, the ContentNext model is only partly made up of ad revenue driven by its blogs. The company also sells reports based on data analysis and organises events, both revenue-earning arms which are not directly affected by the shrinking advertising pie.
Save Our Subs
Now 97 members of our sub-editors' Facebook group. Not sure what to do with them now we are all there, but it's gratifying to see so many people rallying to the standard that is Quality Journalism. And while we're at it, don't forget to book into this Sydney event spruiked by The Australian's Travel and Indulgence section which was previewed the day AFTER it took place. Nice work gang!
PROVIDORE Simon Johnson and chef Andrew Clarke of ROCK Restaurant at Poole's Rock Winery at Pokolbin in the Hunter Valley, NSW, are cooking up a Truffle and Burgundy Dinner focusing on black truffles from Manjimup. The six-course feast will be accompanied by fine wines from Burgundy courtesy of Bibendum. $295 a head, Friday, July 11. www.poolesrock.com.au. (source: The Australian, July 12)
In defence of critics
Here's something that has been exercising me of late - with the army of citizen book/film/theatre/restaurant reviewers out there blogging for all they are worth, what's left for the pro?
The Guardian's Jay Rayner was mightily vexed when he went to review a restaurant with a blogger mate of his only to find his friend had posted a review of the restaurant within hours of pushing the table away.
"The blogger had beaten me into print. I had no choice. I called Simon and asked him to take down his post until my version had appeared. Ever the gentleman, he agreed. From that point on I concluded I could no longer view the blogosphere as source material or even mere displacement activity. Now it was the competition."
Far from being a whine, which is what I first expected, its a good piece and well reported - thanks to some help from, um... a couple of reporters, which canvasses the perfectly serious matter of whether the world of the critic is dying an elegant death. I've got mixed feelings about this one. Firstly, try searching a restaurant review on line from one of the many sites that offer it in Sydney - for example. A lot of these sites tell you very little of any value and you can tell the first two or thrwee recommendations are generated by the owner/manager of the eaterie or his/her brother, uncle, chihuahua.
The other thought I had was that this is precisely the area in which individual journalists can fulfill the predictions of Jeff Jarvis, et al, and build themselves into brands. I'd much rather opt to read a.a gill or Rayner or Simon Thomsen, for example, than some anonymous self-appointed foodie, or thespian or whoever. The same goes for music, films. Criticism depends on a level of expertise and accomplishment that is not always available out there on the blogosphere.
Tata for now...
|
|
|
Save our subs and other stories |
|
Thursday, 10 July 2008 |
|
We now have 70 members for the Save our Subs facebook group which aims to demonstrate why a world without sub-editors is a world of nasty typos, errant apostrophes and just general sloppiness which will not endear readers to journalism, whether it be of the brave-new-world variety or the dead tree model.
We've all read of wholesale carnage on subs' desks throughout the developed world. Here is what some enterprising mastheads have decided to do - ship it all out to India. Others - Fairfax Media included - have decided that their best option is to centralise all subbing operations into what it calls "centres of expertise". This blogger has the right approach:
"Fairfax Media is making appropriately soothing noises about its plan to "review" the positions of as many as 50 sub-editors on its stable of print publications, but the equation is clear enough: it aims to improve quality by cutting service. That service being a quarter of its local sub-editors."
A poster to Public Address also thoughtfully provides us with something from a NZ front page story which shows what sort of nonsense can result when the cold eyes of a trained sub-editor are not brought to bear on one's stories. This from the front page of the NZ Herald:
"Mr Bolger also chairs Kiwibank and New Zealand Post Finance Minister Michael Cullen said the country was lucky to have Mr Bolger had played a major role in success stories of State Owned Enterprises."
Not very nice. This is the handiwork of Pagemasters, which was contracted by Fairfax to take care of its subbing work.
Of course, various tenured academics who used to work in print journalism have called time on the era of sub-editing. here's my piece from Crikey last week on the subject. It spurred me on to found a Facebook group which has now become truly international and has fast grown to 70 members.
The big question is: What Now? Very tempting to ask members to send in the worst copy horrors they have faced every week. We'll cllate the Top 10 and pass them on to the editors of Australia's main metro papers with the massage - this is how subs save your reputation and you NEVER EVEN KNOW!! (obviously all blunders will be filed anonymously. We're not about trying to get reporters into trouble, just about letting the bosses know what things will be like in a world without subs.
What do you think?
Future of Media Conference set for next week..
See your scribe, his boss and a host of (more) worthy media connentators at this conference being held jointly in Sydney and Los Angeles next Tuesday. Ross Dawson unveiled his latest Future of Media report today.
"..many media organizations are experiencing severe challenges, as content proliferates, audiences change behaviors, advertising revenue erodes, and new competitors emerge. Others are prospering as they tap swiftly growing sectors, leverage amateur content creation, tap the power of social networks, and scale production costs."
Links for 10/07/08
Fairfax: Today WA, tomorrow the world (well, Adelaide)
Spot Us starts its first campaign for "public-funded" reporting
iLove my iPhone - an appreciation
American journalism sneezes, we'd better buy a hanky
|
|
|
New material: Rosen, Greenslade, Meyer |
|
|
So, savage cuts to uphold quality? Hmmm |
|
Friday, 04 July 2008 |
|
We have fallen into the habit of watching events in the US and Europe to divine what will shortly come to pass in this profession (craft) of ours. Well, I hope not, becuase all the indicators are suggesting that about now might be the time to take up pole dancing.
According to this from the Chicago Tribune, the L A Times is to axe 250 staff including 150 journalists - in a bid to maintain quality.
Get this: "These moves will be difficult and painful," Stanton wrote in a note to Times staff. "But it is absolutely crucial that as we move through this process, we must maintain our ambition and our determination to produce the highest-quality journalism in print and online, every day."
You never hear managers saying: "we're foregoing our bonuses in a bid to rescue our plummeting share price". Funny that.
The operative word in "sub-editor" is "editor"
Much mithering online and in print forecasting the demise of the sub-editors. Not all of it charitable - in fact, some schadenfreude (subs, please check spelling) from the likes of Jeff Jarvis who think that his public will edit him:
"When I mess up, you tell me. And because this blog is more of a process — a work in progress — than a product — the world neatly packed into a box with a bow on top, as newspapers like to think of themselves — that works well."
Now, I've got loads of time for Jarvis and I think he is on the money in a lot of ways, but this sort of thing, I think, smacks of the former print journo who is volunteeering to drive the hearse for the industry.
Roy Greenslade, another guy for whom I have a bit of time, is also convinced that the green eye-shaded ones' days are numbered (note the nifty use of hyphen and correctly placed apostrophe - oh yes! I've worked downtable). he tempered this somewhat today with this post in the Grauniad, where - as we all know - they know a thing or two about literals...
I have fairly strong views on the subject. As you will read here.
I'm on a promise of lots of beer from The Australian's subs. Off to cash in on some of that right now...
One of whom put me onto this little gem from the New York Times.
30 days (a salutory lesson in newspaper production)
So, we no longer need sub-editors, eh?!
Here's a little beauty sent to me by a friend who may or may not have done the odd bit of subbing and can spot the odd error. The marks are mine and I'm an imperfect sub, as anyn regular reader of this blog will tell you (you know who you are - yes, you Dad). Anyway, read this and HOWL...
Bye for now...
nnnn
|
|
|
