Speculation around MOOC and MOCC

Trying out a radical stance, not getting much response, so maybe just stating obvious anyway. So far posts on other blogs about decline in newspaper sales probably reaching a crunch sometime soonish. and when will TV stop assuming the newspapers decide what is news? Blogs now various so follow @will789gb for sequence.

This one about education. Follows on from Guardian and change of format to tabloid. I find there is very little in print about what the plan is for online. Lots on negative aspects of social media but no obvious plan for what the Guardian intends. Reporting on education seems similar somehow. Peter Scott has stated he will not write about the MOOC ( Massive Open Online Course ) and this pretty much true for other reports.

Headline explanation, MOCC is Monetised Online Course Certificate. Maybe becoming more of a trend.

Latest example Anna Fazackerley on how elite universities would like higher fees and more than others. Apparently the older established need a bigger slice of the cake. Funding is a problem. I cannot see anything in the story on how technology could cut costs. Just how to get more money. Meanwhile the Open University ( not in the Russell Group) has decided to close buildings and invest in online. I am not sure if any other uni has a similar approach.

What is worrying is some of the implications of the article.

One idea rumoured to be doing the rounds in the Treasury is that fees should reflect the salaries graduates can command. In June the government published the first full set of its Longitudinal Education Outcomes dataset, the first of its kind to track higher education leavers from university to the workplace. It highlighted real disparities in earning power across subjects and institutions, with subjects including the creative arts and mass communications coming out particularly badly.

My guess is that "creative arts and mass communications" are not part of the UK research unis to start with. But there could still be economic possibilities, probably around the Pacific.

Pushing my luck even further

The salaries for some subjects varied widely according to which institution graduates had attended. For instance, five years after graduation average earnings for business and administration degrees ranged from £19,400 at the University of Wolverhampton to £71,700 at the University of Oxford.

Is this supposed to mean that Oxford should charge much higher fees? It could be a lot of factors, contacts in the south east etc. Anyone know a difference in what is on offer as content? Could just be an expensive networking situation. Facts welcome, even those to show I am off on a rave.

Meanwhile at MIT the Intersection of Leadership and Technology. Looks good value.

Hello Roy Greenslade, facts please

In the Guardian today, Roy Greenslade writes

A dozen or so years ago, the public’s striking back at the gatekeepers of news seemed refreshing. It notified journalists that ; the top-down journalism of old was no longer relevant. Audiences were not passive consumers. They had opinions too and, at last, were able to express them. 

That initial healthy phase has been transformed into something much more worrying. Having exploded the myth that journalists deal only in facts, aA significant portion of the public, especially the younger generation, have adopted a virulent strain of anti-journalism journalism.

During those dozen years the Guardian started something called Unlimited Talk, arguably an early form of social media. It was closed down without warning. No option for any contributions to be copied by the people who wrote them.

Stories about the web and the Guardian now fail to mention this at all. My impression. Could you please point me to something I missed or find out more? What happened and why?

My conclusion at the moment is that newspaper journalists are unable to come to terms with social media. Comment is Free seemed to have a comment capability but I never got a reply and have stopped looking much. I read the paper out of interest in what I fear is a final phase.

Things could change, there could be a form of citizen journalism that newspapers recognised. But first the facts please.

What is the convention on sacking front bench? / Corbyn strong leader

This is another go at getting some info.

While ago story in both Observer and Sunday Times that Hilary Benn would encourage other members of shadow cabinet to resign as he had lost confidence in Jeremy Corbyn. I think the story may have changed in later editions. In Exeter I get an early one. No way could a party leader allow this sort of story without a response. So I thought.

No surprise then that following a phone conversation when print version available, Benn resigns or is sacked or however you want to describe it.

"Benn sacked in the middle of the night" as some journalists remembered this when reporting the leadership challenge, the non "coup" etc.

With Boris at this time it is perfectly clear who the journalists are, where the info is coming from. (Sun , Telegraph ) some extras no clear source.

Benn has stated that the original stories did not come from him. Strange, some might say. What happened? Some one probably knows.

Main point obviously that Corbyn was strong enough to take action, whatever appeared to be the case as reported in newspapers.

But a bit of detail would be good to know. It becomes more clear that the Brexit disaster was caused in part by media priority for knocking Corbyn at a time when his style of support for Remain would have had a positive consequence.

Guardian Print Media Page - what we might be missing

See previous post, I cannot find Media page in print version of Guardian today. Same last week. No reply yet to tweet query. Same last week.

Have now found blog from Roy Greenslade, might have been intended for print when budgets allowed. My guess, happy to repeat any accurate info from Guardian on when if ever Media page returns.

Very interesting blog post, should be widely known.

Demise of tabloids linked to rightwing politics. Brexit papers listed as Mail. Express, Sun. Should include Telegraph to get a higher number.

Some 64% of Express readers and 63% of Mail readers are aged over 55, while 55% of the Sun’s audience is aged over 45........The rightwing press is heading for its coffin.

But what about newspapers in general? Fairness for the The Mirror-

...staff cuts have had a deleterious effect on its output. It cannot match the Mail for the quantity and range of its content nor the quality of its reporting.
As the Labour party’s faithful supporter, it has also found it hard to find a coherent voice. It has been unable to reconcile its own position, a post-Blairite centrism, with the leftist surge of Jeremy Corbyn. The result? A flip-flop editorial stance. Therefore, the Mirror, while probably reflecting the views of the overwhelming majority of its ageing readership, fails to appeal to the younger generation.

Could not much the same be said about the Guardian? Probably more space hostile to Corbyn than in the Mirror over recent years.

My guess is that things are closer to a crunch than is being reported.

Guardian print readers who are also part of social media should get ready to be agile.

Has Guardian stopped Media section? will circulation drop?

As far as I can tell, unless my confusion is progressing, this is the second week that the Guardian has not had a page for Media. Previously it seemed to be a post from a blog in rotation. Now nothing.

Will this continue? Is it a summer blip? No information I have been aware of.

Thing is these are interesting times for newspapers. Election showed declining influence for Brexit supporters, online support for Corbyn. Much to discuss.

I did tweet last week but got no reply. Maybe a blog post will get more notice. I am not raving on about citizen journalism. Just wondering whether to spend £2 next Monday.

See previous posts for more on citizen journalism and the question, what is the Guardian web strategy?

Guardian Circulation, is there a web strategy?

I noticed Peter Preston mentioned circulation numbers on Sunday. Observer up 8.6 June on May, Guardian 3.8 . "while Tory-backing competitors stayed stagnant or slipped back. Not much of a market, it appears, for the drum beaters of pending Tory triumph".

Well, this sounds ok and explains why Labour did better with social media. Newspapers losing an edge.

But when I start looking for detail through the Press Gazette, things are worse still including the Guardian.

The Sun dropped 10.5 per cent to 1.6m sales a day, the Daily Mirror fell 17 per cent to 641,000 copies and the Sunday Mirror fell 20 per cent to 556,000.
The year-on-year declines may have been worsened by the increased interest in news in June 2016 around Britain’s referendum on leaving the European Union.

Possibly the referendum editorial made a connection but the election was more nuanced.

Guardian down 7%, Observer 6%. Not as striking as the Mirror but not a good trend.

My guess is that the Mirror did not catch much Corbyn support as they were opposed most of this time. Guardian similar. So maybe most of the readership went online. Speculation obviously but facts will follow, especially if trends continue as this would suggest

( see another blog for even more opinionated post on recent journalism )

There must be some level of circulation at which the news operation is not viable. It may not be far off. They seem to concentrate on opinion or a package for news that readers know already from somewhere else.

Twitter / YouTube seems to work well as I find it. TV and radio clips now turn up for most events so you can make your own mind up on what was said.

Guardian still not putting much in print about what they intend to do online. There is much moaning about the web in general, especially Facebook and Google. But is the hard copy just going to complain till the circulation completely vanishes?

By the way there used to be circulation numbers published on the printed Guardian media pages but it seems to have gone completely today.

detail on corbyn heckle, see previous post re trust in media @guardian @afuahirsch ‏

A bit of search on the first Corbyn heckle

full story from BBC site

EU referendum: 'It's your fault, Jeremy' - Corbyn heckled
Jeremy Corbyn has been heckled by Labour activist Tom Mauchline over the EU referendum result while attending the Pride in London march.
He was accused of failing to convince his party's supporters to back the Remain campaign, but replied "I did all I could".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36629976/eu-referendum-it-s-your-fault-jeremy-corbyn-heckled

Then a story from Public Affairs on Canary claims about coup plot and Portland

https://www.publicaffairsnews.com/articles/news/portland-denies-corbyn-plot-claims

"It also noted that the BBC had featured Portland consultant Tom Mauchline in a news item about Corbyn being heckled."

As memory serves the BBC did not introduce the heckle as coming from Tom Mauchline as Portland consultant.

======

Anyway, having started another post and continuing the possibility that mainstream journalists might connect with blogs etc. I am still interested in how it gets to be decided as to who is on which TV show. During the EU referendum there was the official Remain, close to Cameron and No 10, the Labour Remain with Alan Johnson and somewhere Lord Mandelson and Will Straw. It is still unclear to me how much influence Corbyn had in any of this. Was it his own idea to go on the Last Leg? still more reason he should be allowed to use the clip on YouTube. When the polls wobbled Cameron made space for Labour. Turned out to be Gordon Brown then Lord Darling sharing a platform with Osborne. Did not go down well. Will Straw press release after result found space to blame Corbyn. What actually happened? All fine now with the PLP but journalists should explain just a bit what went on.

=====

buzzfeed

https://www.buzzfeed.com/jimwaterson/let-our-friend-stay-corbyn-insists?utm_term=.aueYr1nmO#.fa68LVERA

The Man Who Heckled Jeremy Corbyn Is Actually A Lib Dem Candidate

The criticism of the Labour leader at a pro-Corbyn rally made the evening news bulletins – but it was shouted by Lib Dem Zack Polanski, who was making a stand for the EU.

----

not widely reported at the time, and we still get statements that Corbyn was "lacklustre" etc during referendum.

Hello @afuahirsch update re some topics around @guardian

Today the print Guardian has a media page by Afua Hirsch. Appears as a blog online but is most of what was once the printed media section.

Some positive signs here in awareness of how the mainstream media is regarded. Based on reporting around the Grenfell tower. Previously Emily Bell mentioned the Grenfell Action Group blog but then stated

The local blogs run by tenants, activists and other citizens, find themselves isolated and crowded out in clogged social streams, short on attention, funding and traction. Often they rely on the tenacity and unpaid labour of their founders for survival.

So I return to my question of how there can be some connected way of working in which professional journalists recognise the value of blogs etc. I would like to call this citizen journalism.

Previous posts cover my writing for OhmyNews and their take on citizen journalism. The English language version is no longer published but I subscribe on YouTube and know something continues. Briefly the argument is that journalism needs to adapt to recognise the read / write web and change connection with readers/ the public / do they mean us? Investment in editing and training, not a vast news room.

Guardian at the time thought citizen journalism as was a joke. Maybe they thought the media pages only read by pro journalists not the public but can't say I found it funny.

Anyway, and I am trying to be positive, main decision was to junk Guardian Unlimited Talk without warning and without any offer for contributions to be backed up. As memory serves Comment is Free was promoted around the same time. So comments could be added but nature of discussion changed.

Facebook often reported as getting most of the online advertising. Any theory as to why this is? Do print journalists think about the format?

My guess is that it is now too late for much to change. Print version has so much about online troubles, not much about any potential in Guardian website.

But I ask the question anyway. Could the next Guardian take on social media include some accurate history about Talk Unlimited? If there is a backup some offer to original source would be welcome.

Something might work better on a local basis. Video for example as local newspapers have limited resources but can make links.

Corbyn in Europe

Another thing to mention. Afua Hirsch writes about a "feeling" that Corbyn has been deliberately maligned. We can get to facts as well as feelings. Mostly about what actually happened during the referendum and how reported. It has been assumed that "Blame Corbyn" was an option waiting for an occasion. Briefly from previous posts

- heckles reported by BBC news blaming Corbyn for result appeared to be from Labour supporters, actually from people linked to Portland Communications and the Lib Dems

- Channel 4 refused permission for Jeremy Corbyn to show clip from Last Leg on his own YouTube channel. So reports on 7 out of 10 score were out of context.

Also

"Hilary Benn sacked in the middle of the night" was initiated by two newspaper stories in Observer and Sunday Times, both saying Benn was stating a lack of confidence in Corbyn. Both stories changed in later editions but we get an early one here in Exeter. Later Benn denied knowing how the story started. Surely some print journalist knows what happened?

-------

could expand this but mostly repeating previous posts

comment welcome and/or where to go into detail

Social media is significant part of the 2017 election

In short, a tumultuous week showed mainstream media doing what it’s supposed to: reporting, reflecting, arguing, stirring. And social media? Many heartfelt exchanges, many echoes of shock and sorrow, but with customary fakery and trolling – instructions for bomb-making mingled with denunciation and perspective damned hard to come by.

So says Peter Preston. No perspective?

Thing is, may be changing. See another blog on Fleet Street in Cyberspace and Europe for recent comment on anti Corbyn bias. But Preston has this covered for the BBC

 There’s been mounting disapproval over its hostile treatment of Jeremy Corbyn, and deference to Theresa, since campaigning began. But nobody who saw Laura Kuenssberg tear into the PM on U-turn morning could maintain that now

However at that time the press were in competition to find the most quotable manner in which to be obvious. Have a look at the IRA questions from @afneil #marr etc. btw I still think Kuenssberg doc on Corbyn and referendum missed out a whole section on Lord Darling, how Lord Darling came to be centre stage, soforth. Someone still knows, only a year ago)

=====

Andrew Rawnsley

The focus on leadership, the “presidential” strategy that looked such a no-brainer when this election was called, has not had the effect that most anticipated. I think some of this is down to Jeremy Corbyn. Not because he has fought an outstanding election, but because his frailties as a candidate for the premiership were extremely well known before the campaign had started. A hefty majority of his own MPs had previously declared him unfit for leadership, so anything the Tories had to add to that was likely to be superfluous comment. I expect the Tories to launch a monstering of the Labour leader in the final leg of the campaign. This may not have the impact that they are looking for, if I am right to suspect that attitudes towards him were already largely baked in to Labour’s share.

Thing is, I think this is completely wrong. Guardian and BBC as much as any media have been in total Corbyn attack mode since he stood for election as Labour leader. No change there maybe. But public image much changed by talking direct to camera without any spin from press reporters.

Also social media allows direct communication, feedback, response to questions.
Next few weeks could be interesting, followed by more facts and analysis on who reads newspapers and what to think.

=============

repeating yet again but meant as a positive suggestion

possibly Guardian Media Group in in transformation to something online

when the print version is always knocking social media it is not helping the brand

Guardian Unlimited Talk trashed the work of a mass of people, lost from history as in Guardian writing

but consequence continues

please stop knocking online media @gabyhinsliff

Observer has an article by Gaby Hinsliff considering the possibility that there is media bias against Corbyn.

Just to repeat a few things.

she mentions "rivers of online abuse" aimed at Laura Kuenssberg. My concerns are the show she did about the referendum that implied Corbyn was to blame for Labour performance. The section on the phase when Labour was asked to take over ignored the actual presentations from Brown and Lord Darling. It was just wrong. Also recent interview reveals that Labour policy on EU trade is very different to Conservatives, this is just not what comes over.

Main thing though is the remarks about online. --"propaganda sheets like the Canary"...reporters worry about truth in a hyper partisan world...

As far as I know the BBC reported two heckles during 2016, both against Jeremy Corbyn. On Twitter and other sources it has been suggested that one was connected with Portland Comms and the other with the Lib Dems. Thing is I have never found any contrary reporting so what to think?

"Facebook messages tend to be shared among the likeminded"

Newspapers have a bit of a funding crisis and spend less on news resources. opinion is the thing. so they become tighter on marketing and discipline. online has more variety as far as I can tell.

You are offering an apology for the rest of Fleet Street and the Guardian Corbyn knocking. My guess is that quite a lot of readers will move online to find media they can trust or talk to each other.

Guardian Media Group so hostile to online in print version it is hard to accept the online version as genuinely part of that scene.

alt left may be best label for Corbyn supporters

I notice alt left seems ok in Guardian terms as they try to promote online in USA.

opinion found online.

Their line on Corbyn in UK print still mostly knocking though. I will explore more about this alt left and see what makes sense.

The idea that Corbyn Brexit detail deserves no space in print makes no sense at all.

Are buildings still a good investment for universities?

This is just a note, bit bigger than a tweet.

Not sure where this week will end up on radio. Thursday I hope to talk to the Storyteller about a fiction drama located on Lancaster campus. So this post is a reminder about reality.

The MOOC is better thought of now than a while ago. LEarning happens anyway as part of social media but this still not integrated with academic scene.

Futurelearn seems to be getting closer to income streams. Working with Deakin so model will reach UK sometime. See recent story in EdSurge for more.

If online education is seen as viable, when will there be a question about buildings? So far much investment has been in the campus, some of it iconic. This will continue and to make interesting video we need good sets. But presumably Deakin spend on IBM Watson funds that are not spent on bricks. The OU has closed regional centres and spent more on FutureLearn so far. When will this be seen as sensible, and what follows?

More later.

Polly Toynbee, BBC , Soft Fleet Street

Just catching up on TV, missed it this morning.

Andrew Marr on YouTube already with Jeremy Corbyn interview.

Sunday Politics on BBC catchup.

Polly Toynbee as balance between the Sun and the Spectator. Difference of view on Jeremy Corbyn? Not a lot.

Would Labour use a drone against ISIS? Will the USA request such a thing? It may turn out that the relevant issues during the election are not those supposed by the Fleet Street / BBC news operation.

Andrew Marr claimed that Corbyn and May similar on Brexit as both want a Single Market. Who is sure about this? Who has eaten the cake and or kept it? Surely May will be asked some questions later.

But Guardian columnists mostly just knocking Corbyn one would guess.

notes on mode 1 , mooc etc

Later there will be another post on online courses, starting with business schools.

Probably a longer one ahead of BETT next year. There is not enough reporting on what happens.

I base my guess on the Guardian still. Both what appears and what is hidden or mostly hidden. "special report" on 7 March can't find on official website but is on Pressreader. Seems to have been supported in print by half page ad from University of Derby. They are mentioned, as is Falmouth and Imperial.

MOOC mention in last column, then Futurelearn.

I still think Futurelearn is major news, as was obvious at BETT.

Helena Pozniak is a freelance journalist, this "special report" is not part of the main education pages.

Page 35 Peter Scott complains about commercial pressure but no mention of MOOC or even tech. My guess is still that the innovation will not come from the existing research stars, see previous posts. Still no update on Mode 1 etc.

Adult learning

cuts ( and unis less interested)

Guardian proper report no mention of the MOOC

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/feb/21/pop-up-classes-adult-learning-further-education

My guess newspapers so worried about online and social media share of advertising that they are reluctant to report digital disruption potential

needs a bit more to make the post convincing

Notes on Green Screens at Tubers Exeter

I realise I am way behind with edits and reports from BETT and trip to Lancaster. But Exeter situation intervenes. There is now a Tubers Academy, intended for young contributors to YouTube but the space is also available for hire. I have invited JD to join me next Wednesday in the VR space, ( green screens on each wall ) . We will test it out and maybe record some questions or comments.

Could fit with sequence from Lancaster campus or other locations, past or future. My recent topic was the voice interface for computers. But could be the MOOC, university response to the MOOC, or a swich of resources from buildings to online if this was the case. For video there is still an interest in locations so campus architecture is still welcome. But a completely green room raises a question in itself. Still looking into what studio resource is available for different sites.

So suggestions welcome. Do you have an interesting background or an existing talking head on a solid colour?

Topics could include what to make of the Tubers situation. So far I am not sure anyone has made enough from YouTube to cover the fees. But we may meet such people later. Raises a question what skills should be taught in school, uni ? Video edit?

Previously


We will not be messing about so much on Wednesday, actual content sometime soon.

Corbyn PMQs and Guardian sense of fairness

My belief is that the Guardian now starts with opinion and then works out what to do with the reporting. As in the Louise Mensch distinction of belief and reporting. Just my conclusion based on recent observation. BBC News channel interview with John McDonnell could have concentrated on NIC U Turn but diverts to Alastair Campbell comment on Corbyn. Apparently he asked the wrong questions. So I looked on the iPlayer for actual record. Corbyn asked several on topic then switched to social care and education.

Today found a tweet, maybe the BBC source.

Also couple of clips on YouTube



Make your own mind up.

Guardian in print same sort of thing as my tweet remarked on yesterday. Not as full a report as online but similar in intention. Page 4 half way down third column "earlier the issue had dominated PMQs......he then frustrated some of his own backbenchers by switching tack to focus on education". Doubtless the Guardian has a source for this view from "some backbenchers".

I realise this is in the readG blog not the one about the EU and Fleet Street but my belief now is that something similar happened during the referendum. some people are so determined to get rid of Jeremy Corbyn that they undermine the case he is making. Was it really such a good idea for Lord Darling to concentrate on economic issues in support of George Osborne?  My belief is that Corbyn had a much better grasp of the issues that matter to people. The social and educational aspects of the EU could have been much better reported.

Another Guardian editorial suggests that lies are possible online. I now read the Guardian not for news but to be amazed at how they report it. To hear from Parliament I rely on YouTube, RT and the official channel for Jeremy Corbyn,

Time Travel, possible link to Guardian

It may be possible to work with the idea of time travel as a way to communicate with the literary aspect of the Guardian. Recent article in the Review by James Gleick has a couple of quotes worth thinking about. Somehow the world of academic journals seems to assume some long-term value that technology can interfere with. Seems to overlap with forms of print. Sci-fi is associated with a possible positive take on the future.

The more modern sort of person – “the creative, organising, or masterful type” – sees the future as our very reason for being: “Things have been, says the legal mind, and so we are here. The creative mind says we are here because things have yet to be.” Wells, of course, hoped to personify that creative, forward-looking type.

The conclusion has a reasonable take on the current scene around social media-

A river of messages is a “timeline”– you’re in my timeline; I heard it in my timeline – but the sequence is arbitrary. Temporal ordering can scarcely be trusted. The past, the present, the future go round and collide, bumper cars in a chain of distraction. When distance separates the thunder from the lightning, cyberspace puts them back together.
In the wired world, creating the present becomes a communal process. Everyone’s mosaic is crowd-sourced, a photomontage with multiple perspectives. Images of the past, fantasies of the future, live videocams, all shuffled and blended. All time and no time. The path back through history is cluttered, the path forward cloudy.

So this could be a way to look at print and web over time. There are trends but also loops. For example I still think the Guardian may stop the weekday print version but when this happens is unknown. It just seems more likely from time to time. Saturday in long form ok for a while.

So my blogs still include speculation / observation but no precision as to timing.

Draft outline, digital disruption and business schools

This post is to check out for response and get some updates on recent developments. For a while I have been interested in how media organisations transition with digital technology. It sometimes seems to me that academics and business schools comment about this as if they are not part of it. Somehow the buildings and campus will continue as a base even if FM radio for example disappears in the cloud.

Next week Learning Technologies has some involvement from HE so I will try to check things out. This week at BETT there were a couple of events that might make a lead news item.

Futurelearn won the BETT Award for Free Digital Content/Open Educational Resources for Schools. I don't think they are yet much recognised at HE level. The Open University has cut back on regional support centres in the UK though they continue to invest in Futurelearn. I don't know of other examples where this sort of switch has already happened.

The Department for International Trade had a theatre where one presentation was from the Online Business School. I did do a video but the background noise is a problem Here are some stills to show the gist of it. BETT is a solid tech show and I guess there will be more HE over time, including some more examples of digital plans, maybe with some disruption in the background.

Any links or content most welcome. I will try to do an expanded post in the next week or two.

Steven Poole , content marketing, MOOC , Peter Scott

Today Steven Poole in Review on native ads and other aspects of being online. Trouble is he makes no obvious mention of the situation around newspapers. Why is the darkside of the web finding so much space in newsprint nowadays? Meanwhile the Postgrad pullout section is the only place for news about the MOOC. See post on what is not at BETT in another blog.

When will the Guardian write about the MOOC in context of a general article on policy and context? Will it involve Peter Scott? Maybe the Tuesday section no longer sells enough advertising to justify the sort of expense required. So the MOOC will only turn up in the pullout sections with the initiative coming from advertisers.

Also could there be reporting of the MOOC as value compared to the Guardian courses? You know the sort of thing - £49 for three hours on how to be a critic. Why not try a MOOC and decide if you want a certificate towards the end of the course? It may not be much more expensive. Surely there is copy here for someone?

Fake News and loss making newspapers

Things are speeding up. See previous posts for usual comments, here are some notes on recent Guardian.

Paul Mason on Facebook and Google. He likes Soundcloud and Medium but doubts they can survive. I do not think he is fair about the length of clips on YouTube. There is a lot of long clips from lectures and conferences.

10th Jan news that Trinity Mirror is trying to work with the Express. there could be more reporting on the business background for this kind of move.

Today story about "fake news" quickly becomes one about social media

The News Media Association has previously warned ministers that Google and Facebook were unfairly making money out of journalism produced by its members.

I think we should get more about what the plan is and less knocking copy on the web as it is. Any news could be "fake" and needs to be considered with a views on who is writing it. the newspapers need to consider that the web is read / write so involves the audience, people like us, see previous posts etc.

If Jeff Jarvis was still writing on a Monday I would be more positive about weekday print continuing in 2017. As it is I expect more about "fake news" and not much in print about what the news organisation websites are trying to do or how the public can relate to them.

So far neither Google of Facebook have closed a site without warning destroying all content I contributed. Sorry to keep repeating this, probably time to move on.

Guardian hello

This is written as if someone at the Guardian may read it. Just to clarify. I mention this because of a Steven Poole opinion on Saturday.

Generally speaking, just as people say things over the internet that they would never dare say to someone’s face, abusive marginalia is not meant for the author’s eyes. In an age when furious readers fire off torrents of poorly spelled invective directly to the author via email or Twitter, simply writing rude comments in a copy of the book that the author will never see seems the height of good manners.

This post is meant for the Guardian, readers writers edit suite whatever. What time is it? Trends in print sales? Should there be some guidance on web policy? The print version recently is mostly negative on web. So what else is proposed?

In this way, then, the centuries of marginalia in printed books make up a kind of invisible republic of readers and writers having extended conversations through history. By contrast, the fact that you can’t scribble in the margins of electronic books reflects the paradoxical atomisation of an internet age in which everything shouts about how “social” it is. And so here is one more reason to cherish the printed book: you can talk back to it, and to future readers.

Nonsense, surely? Is there some sort of archive on Unlimited Talk?

By the way, thanks for the discount tokens. But I stick to my forecast. either print Guardian Monday to Friday will cease during 2017 or at least the possibility will reach some sort of public conversation.

Citizen Journalism worth another look?

Not sure what citizen journalism is at the moment but I come across signs of problems with newspapers especially. Is it time to look back at this and work out some new variation? I contributed to OhmyNews International. the English language version. Recently I come across OhmyNews video on YouTube but I don't understand Korean.

One of the points made when OhmyNews was launched ws that the business model of existing news was not going to work online. The web is write as well as read. Some sort of collaboration would follow.

It seems though that news organisations are still reluctant to change their approach. I find the Guardian is now going backwards. Unlimited Talk as closed down. In print there is some negative coverage about social media but very little about how the web site is different or what the plan is.

Recent article from Peter Preston inludes much history and some numbers.  I notice that the "users" only appear when prepared to pay money

users, especially young people, were used to paying to use their mobile phones.

although this did not last long on tablets. Thing is, no mention at all of the reader as a source of content in any form.

I have found another article by Jay Rosen that has some possibilities. Part one was about the problems for US media in Trump era. Part two looks at positive ideas-

From journalists is only one way Americans get news now. They get it directly from newsmakers, as with Trump’s Twitter feed. They get it from ideological cadres styled as news sources, like Breitbart. They get it from entertainers like Rush Limbaugh (an opponent of the press) or John Oliver (an ally of accountability journalism). They get it from friends and family members passing along a personalized mix of stuff. They get it from people interested in the same things who collect online and pool information. 

Thing is, why not work with this? The people who collect online pools of information may have a perspective.

In the UK I find it easier to follow Jeremy Corbyn directly on Twitter than rely on the Guardian for fair reporting. Maybe this is just me but I guess more of this direct content will be part of the future. Some journalists also turn up on Twitter with links to comment. Somehow more connections could develop. This is likely to be through social media rather than platforms such as OhmyNews. At least that is my guess. The editing function is still there when links are repeated or comment added.

More on this later in the year. Meanwhile stories around BETT will be partial, derivative and a bit vague. Still they may contribute something. Sort out in Feb may suggest a better pattern for future occasions.

Corbyn Finds Voice ( in the Guardian )

To be fair and balanced as one tries to be in a blog, you have to consider the facts. Recently the Guardian did have an interview  with Jeremy Corbyn and it seems to have been well reported. He compares Teresa May with Henry VIIIth for use of the royal prerogative. So this may bode well for 2017. As the Guardian campaigns around Brexit the official leader of the opposition is a useful part of the mix.

Also the interview clarifies Corbyn views on immigration and the single market. Guardian can refer back if they get puzzled. Sometimes the reporting has been so limited that all sorts of claims are made.

My guess is that Corbyn will find more of a voice on Brexit during this year. He is now working with socialist groups in Europe and making a positive case away from the influence of Cameron and Mandelson. I doubt if it will be much reported in much of mainstream media but social media now finds a larger proportion of UK opinion.