Poke Me

I am sure that Facebook generates a lot more money now than it did when I first became a user, but am I the only one who longs for the simpler days?

Now, I have to check my Facebook account every five seconds to make sure that no one has posted an embarrassing photograph of me or written something inappropriate on my wall. Also, sometimes I just feel, well, overexposed. So what do I do? Delete my account? But then all of my friends who are avid users will not be able to get in touch with me, and what are the chances that they know my email address?

When I first logged into Facebook, it was as a prospective Trinity student. At the time, Facebook was open only to college students, so I used a friend's log in information to look at pictures of students at Trinity. A year later, I opened my own account. Facebook consisted of information such as interests, favorite movies, TV shows, quotes, etc. The only photo that was displayed was the profile photo, and people could post on your wall, but it looked more like a blog post and they had to sign their names afterward. Something like 5 posts could show up at any given time, so I had to delete less important ones to leave up my favorites.

Facebook has now become a source of controversy, drawing a lot of attention from the debate over privacy on the Internet. How many times have we been told that our future employers will have access to our accounts. How does anyone in the future intend to run for a position in government with the photos that will be of them all over the Internet??

I miss the days when there was a little Facebook guy in the upper left hand corner, and the most exciting thing to happen on my account was that I got poked.

PS Can someone please bring back the poke?

The Hartford Courant: Plagiarism or Just Lazy Journalism?

Thoughts on plagiarism by the Hartford Courant....

I think that it has become general procedure for newspapers to take information from other news sites. I think that better news meaning collaborating with media outlets that are able to focus on a smaller issue or population. However, collaboration implies that the other media outlets were informed that their piece would be used. Also, since it is the larger media organizations putting the smaller ones out of business, it is important that the smaller (collaborating) one get the credit. This means that maybe instead of using the article as a source, the Hartford Courant could have posted a link on their web site. This would be a better method of acknowledging that the Courant is not able to adequately cover everything.

I agree with Matt's line of thought in that I find this to be poor journalism and lazy, but also, not plagiarism. I think that since so many people use web sites as their primary source of information that the creation of a site that combines the resources of several different media outlets would be better than expecting any one organization to cover all the stories to the fullest extent. If more than one organization covers a story, then links can be placed to the different accounts of the story, allowing readers to get a more informed view of the story from different perspectives.

More On Bowden's Atlantic Story: Power to the People

As I highlighted below, Bowden's central thesis was unclear and too mixed with side arguments and comments. One huge point I drew out amidst the craziness was that blogs mean more "eyes" watching. They mean that there are multiple sources of news, and people who do have the time to explore more in depth and issue or a developing story have a space to publish that information. Bad policies are not as easily passed as they were before and tyrants do not as easily go unchecked. Take the case of the most recent election in Iran. The protests were largely organized via blogs and Twitter. Ahmadinejad can control the sanctioned news outlets but he can only control the blogs as fast as he can shut them down. Blogs mean the furthering of democracy, putting power in the hands of the people as it was originally intended. The primary problem then is how journalism as a profession can survive. Bowden says that we need to couple this with a financial model that works. But, maybe the profession of journalism is fated to end. This does not mean the end of good reporting; it means the beginning of a new kind of media.

How do we police the veracity of claims made by this new media? When students write papers, they don't run to the library so much as scour the Internet. We have adapted to learn which sites to trust and which to ignore. Web sites and blogs are held accountable for what they write by their name. They are not responsible to the people, but if they want to gain followers and national attention and (thus become financially viable) then they have to be accurate. People will comment on fallacies on sites. I would not be surprised if a web site pops up directed exclusively at keeping popular sites in line, reporting on bad reporting.

Bias In the Media: Bias Becomes Scandal, Scandal Sells

After reading Mark Bowden's The Story Behind the Story, I was not entirely convinced of his point. As a case-study, it was very interesting to read, and I liked that he found the source of the Sotomayer videos, but his ultimate argument was unclear. Okay, so, reporting has become more about presenting propaganda than find the truth, but to blame that transformation on the rise of ambitious bloggers is inaccurate. If he meant to blame it on the rise of the Internet, I might buy his argument; however, even then, I think that this change in reporting has to do with what the public wants. Whereas in the past, the public wanted to the truth and all of the scandal that its unveiling brought with it. Nothing has changed except that the media has lowered its standards in order to bring the public what it wants: that scandal, that biased, scathing remark. There is a reason why some news makes headlines. The Internet does contribute to the spreading of inaccurate reporting, but it is still the reputation of the news organizations that is on the line when they publish a story regardless of context.

One Writer's Quest to Unearth the 'Twitterverse'

Last Spring, everyone was abuzz about the new Twitter craze; well, at least the media was. The new vocabulary that Twitter had generated left me completely confused -- what the hell was a tweet? -- so I decided to investigate. After creating an account and spending a couple of weeks reading Twitter guides on sites such as Mashable, I decided I knew enough to write an article for the Tripod where I was the Features editor. For those of you in the class who are completely confused, check out the article (I also posted it here on an experimental blog that contains links to some of the information I collected). Bear in mind that Twitter really is whatever you make of it. Also, no one cares that you have been reading some article or watching some movie for hours. Readers want to be able to engage with the people they follow on Twitter: USE LINKS.

Take a look at Persephone's Twitter Stats

Old Media Tries to Put Pulse Back Into Stale Forms of Entertainment

Today, while scanning the web, I came across this article on Gawker: "Emmys Are Relevant Again, Declares Dying Old Media". I personally did not catch the Emmy's -- I believe I was watching Zorro on ABC Family -- but the article makes an interesting point. According to Gawker, the Old Media, such as the NY Times and USA Today, described the Emmys as a huge success. The Washington Post's Tom Shales notably went so far as to say that in the award show "America's traditional old broadcast networks staged a comeback." Gawker then goes on to criticize the show, saying, 


"But in the end, 90 percent of the show is reading lists of names and listening to pompous speeches punctuated by dumb jokes, and even a teenage doctor can't make that relevant for the modern age."


Is the Old Media merely attempting to put a pulse back into an antiquated form of entertainment? The New Media says yes, and that there is no room for the Emmys, or the nostalgic perspective of the Old Media for that matter, in today's modern age.

Cary Grant and Old Media Glamour

In class Monday night, a student waxed nostalgic about the old media as if it was a thing of the past to be missed by future generations. I was immediately reminded of Cary Grant in His Girl Friday, a movie which captures a time when reporters spoke too fast and couldn't get enough of the action. When I decided to enter the world of journalism, I'm not sure that I was looking for that ruthless, fast-paced lifestyle, but I definitely did not imagine myself sitting behind a computer, communicating with my editor via iChat. (Although, I should admit that as far as fact-checking goes, the Internet is a godsend.)