Observer and web policy

There must be more going on than we are told. Guardian sell off Manchester local paper and others. The new launch of the Observer seems to be just smaller. The Media and Business section looks like ending up as part of news. I find little explanation of this in the Media pages. Peter Preston mentions that the CEO talks of "digital disruption" but that is the full quote about what may be a strategy. Long ago on a Saturday there was a blog page in which people from the Guardian explained what they were doing. Why not bring this back? People who read the Guardain and Observer could contribute to something new. On Monday John Mulholland wrote about a "digital revolution" without explaining what the new approach had to do with it.

I still think citizen journalism is worth detailed study. So far the Observer has been even more dismissive of bloggers etc. than the Guardian. Will this change?

There are reports of declining use of MySpace. My guess is that Rupert Murdoch's constant claims for paid content are not helping. He appears not to like the stuff that is offered for free. Something similar may happen with newspaper titles that do not have a clear web presence or interactivity. Meanwhile presumably the money from the regional operation will be spent on something.

"Research" universities

"Research" universities make strong claim on Guardian page one. Meanwhile still thinking about BETT. Continues on learn9 blog.

Trade show exists in web context (part one)

Monday's print Guardian confirms my impression from last week - the Google phone was the star of CES. Emily Bell is clearly taking it as significant for media. By the way, her writing is the right length for a newspaper which is what I have bought. I may got to a website for technology news but I think the print version should cover technology also. Where is Victor Keegan expected or do I have to search every page?

Charles Arthur (Technology Editor) has no mention for Google but points out that Apple got more attention than the Microsoft CES keynote. Also he links to a Wired UK blog about how magazines may need to get used to video and audio as well as the web as a print equivalent. Will this topic turn up at BETT? Parents may yet be blamed not only for failing to teach children to talk but also not having equipment to edit video.

More about this as BETT news clarifies. see Madeleine Bunting (page 29) for background.

Next post will be on the IPEX blog about the companies that will not attend the NEC. News on the Printweek website about liquidation of Positive Focus prompted me to ask what this implied for IPEX? this is the sort of company that makes a visit worthwhile. Later comments included the suggestion that for web software companies actual real life shows were not essential.

Tuesday

Coming out of Xmas, starting to study the Guardian more carefully. There was nothing at all for two days last week. Then this week so far no section on Media or Education. I know the Technology has gone but this may be what 2010 may be like. The sections will vanish as and when the advertising drops away. Content will still turn up on other pages.

Today the theme seems to be the e-book. An actual advert from Sony on the whole back page. News about Amazon sales through Kindle overtaking hard copy, maybe just because of the number of Kindles as presents. LG are planning a range of devices and have a contract for e-paper. Not much news about education as such but a letter follows earlier reports on cuts to university funding. Lewis Elton suggests more use is made of the Open University, "arguably the most successful innovation in higher education in the past fifty years". Elton suggest that expanding the OU would be "far more cost effective than any other method to treat the present crisis."

However the OU methods could be applied more widely. I am following the Cloudworks site and suggesting e-books links. Hosted at the OU but globally connected. So far education technology has mostly been based on paper. The thing is my guess is that the Education section of the Guardian rarely covers how gigital changes this. There will be supplements soon around BETT.

Monday

No Media section but the Scotland Correspondent , Severin Carrell, reports that culture Minister Margaret Hodge is pressing for faster introduction of powers for libraries to archive UK websites. That is UK plus Trinity College Dublin. This story could have started in Scotland, the National Libray of Scotland as wel as the British Library is reported as "dismayed" at delays since legislation six years ago . Also mentioned the National Library of Wales, Cambridge University Library and the Bodleian in Oxford. Seems quite complicated as a structure. Many UK sites have a global reach so the archiving may not suit an arrangement developed for print.

Carrell reports that "the internet is fast becoming the dominant form of publication in the UK : about a third of all works now published are only in digital form and that number is incereasing." Included from 2010 will be the Technology section for the Guardian. I thought this was the most interesting news around the time of the Online Information event. OhmyNews editors changed my headline to make it more general rather than just about the Guardian. I think the Guardian could do more to explain itself. The Media coverage is often negative towards bloggers and web news. If there is a strategy to move the Guardian online, why not explain?

Sunday / Previously

Peter Preston claims that the industry structure for newspapers in the USA "bears scant relationship to anything in Great Britain". So the "Lear-like self-flagellation" from New York has no relevance. What is he thinking of? Fortunately Buzzmachine continues as a blog. The work around a future business model for news organisations is surely worth checking out.

37% annual growth for what Preston calls "Guardian and Observer" website. But this comes in a disjointed paragraph from what is happening with newspaper economics or the view from New York. By the way, book publishers in New York seem to be taking a different view on Scribd. London not connected at the moment.

Previously Preston wrote in the Guardian objecting to getting so much email greetings instead of proper printed cards, part of the "wasteland of cyberspace". Maybe in 2010 Preston will find something positive to say, even about bloggers. Readers of the Guardian and Observer may contribute content online and this could be part of a new business model. There were reports that the Business and Media section will be part of the main paper soon. The Simon Caulkin column was dropped but a LinkedIn complaint group continues. Search on "The Observer needs Caulking!" What would it take for this energy to be part of the Guardian/Observer website?

FT model makes a lot of sense

Still no news about news re Guardain Tech. They are closing down then print, moving online. But there is no comment.

Meanwhile the FT and Cengage launched a digital archive of FT to 2006 yesterday at Online Information. I did some video but don't know how it looks. More on this later.

Today spoke to people at FT stand. They have a subscription offer for digital content on any platform that includes Factiva Lexis Nexis etc etc - all the combiners of content widely regarded as legit, at least here in Olympia. The deal seems to be that FT results do not show up unless the password check out. If you go direct to the FT site you get three clicks, not five as in the new Google model.

This seems to combine reasonable access for free and an income for the hard working journalists. So a possible future would be that you need to subscribe to the News of the World to get the best value from Microsoft.

Technology Guardian moves online

Now back with more web access so can follow up print news on Thursday that the Technology section will not be printed as of 2010. Strange thing is that there was nothing about this from Peter Preston yesterday or the media bit today. Fact and opinion are to be kept apart but surely this is news, something to write about. how can you have a media bit that is often rude about bloggers, citizen journalism etc. and claims that the problems of print are not that urgent, then have a Thursday report that a section will be online only? by the way, the Technology lot want us the readers to write in about it. No payment on offer.

I really do think they should be more informative for the print audience. The policy seems to be to have an online offer that is suitably modern and available free while the people who pay get a limited view. And nonsense from columnists about the dangers of bloggers but anyway back to some sourced speculation.

Will media on a Monday be next?

Copied from journalism.co.uk

The Financial Times’ managing editor, Dan Bogler suggested that while newspapers like the Times or Guardian might not be able to charge for general news, or the front pages, they might be able to charge for niche areas, something he knows they are thinking about.

“The Guardian is big on media, is big on public sector jobs, if they bundled that content both print and online and charged for it, I bet you they could. They might not be able to charge for everything they have but they could charge for certain parts,” said Bogler.

“Yeah well, definitely, Dan’s right – clearly he’s got the inside track on this,” Kelner said.

“The Guardian is looking at the Media being an online section as opposed to being with the newspaper and certainly that is one of the niches the Guardian could charge for.”

MediaGuardian recently celebrated its 25th birthday in print and is read by 525,000 readers every week, according to its advertising information; online it attracts 950,000+ unique users per month.

This is crazy. Will the price be reduced for the people who no longer get a print version of the Technology or Media?

Who is supposed to read the sections? Is it the normal Guardian reader, whoever we are, or is it specialists working in media or tech? Do the people who work in media want to read Peter Preston on the "bilious bloggers"? Enough to pay extra online?

What about some reporting for the general reader on what is actually happening?

More to come on this story I think.

glories of the past are gone

Glories of the past are gone, financial that is and for the music industry. They need to transform to a promising future in ringtones, downloads and streaming. That is the guardian media verdict for Monday 2nd. For newspapers it turns out that "print is not dead" but they seem to be aware of a transformation and news organisations are coping quite well as revenue increases slightly when you include online. Another encouraging sign is that Peter Preston boasts of the UK newspaper success with websites that score well with page views from the USA. I think the Guardian is making a move. However the new model may still need more respect for the readers/contributors than print journalists are used to.

Complaint about missing report on Kindle in UK

Today Friday I found an item in the Guardian about the Amazon Kindle. On the business pages towards the end the headline was that Microsoft have no plans for an e-reader. There is a brief mention that Amazon launched an international version of the Kindle two days ago. I don't think there was anything in the Guardian on Thursday, even in the Tech section. The news was in an email alert on Wednesday from the Bookseller so I am continuing to check the daily email as it seems to cover digital publishing fairly well. Coverage of the Kindle continues on the Neill Denny blog. The Teleread blog has more about ePUB but file formats have always been a minority interest.

The Guardian however seems to me to be fairly reliable about the impact of technology on music or television but has series of blankouts when it comes to print, publishing or journalism. Through a search I have found two blog entries for Technology and Digital Content but I am concerned about the printed version that is charged for and the sort of reporting it provides. The print audience is just being informed about what is available online. The implications for Guardian policy are also not dealt with.

Over the last decade Amazon has changed the UK book market to a large extent. The availability of the Kindle will move this in a deeper direction. UK media may ignore it without a UK specific launch but I think many Guardian readers will find out about it. USA news titles are already available for download. The nature of the Amazon launch evidences a take on global media in itself.

My guess is that the Books section of the Guardian tomorrow will have no mention of the international Kindle or what it implies. The extracts from the Bookseller stopped a while ago. Extracts from a range of blogs also vanished. Now there is a bit from the Guardian blog though it appears to be much like a long piece of text from a columnist with maybe a comment at the end with no response. They will have to talk about something else now the Booker is over.

Jeff Jarvis and the Press Association

Jeff Jarvis is backing the Press Association moves on local news.

But will this just be reporters on a classic model? How to involve citizens? Many Guardian writers ignore such issues but maybe Jeff Jarvis will consider this later.

local news and Press Asssociation

Alan Rusbridger is on Twitter and uses it to promote his view that funding should be available for the Press Association to report local news now that newspapers and ITV find this difficult. He welcomes Twitter as a way to amplify existing media.

What about Twitter as a way for anyone to publish, a way to build communities of people who share news? Is the only option to pour money into existing models? something missing here, I think.

Greenslade still on about the BBC

It never stops. Print journalists and former print journalists such as blogger Roy Greenslade are still on about the BBC as if the free BBC news is the reason they have a problem.

A recent story in the Guardian (that i can't find at the moment, tried the Guardian search and can only find opinions similar to Roy Greenslade) reported that 16% of respondents backed the approach of forcing the BBC to charge for content in order to make life easier for commercial companies. So why is this opinion constantly repeated by journalists? Is it worth £1.90 to read stuff you know you don't agree with and is only written from self interest. A Radio Times might be a better bet on the weekend.

Source Digital Spy found through Google News

Guardian salaries compare with BBC

Even though the BBC is offering free video for newspapers the questions continue. the Guardian has revealed that the BBC spend money on hospitality for promotion at trade shows. the thing is they actually manage to sell stuff so can continue with projects such as Dr Who. I think this is ok and that the Guardian is being a bit silly.

Recent info is that the editor, Alan Rusbridger is paid around £400,000 and Carolyn McCall, chief exec, is paid almost £500,000 down from £800,000 last year. So the bonus system is based on performance. Rusbridger will reduce salary further in future.

The controller of BBC1 is paid between £250-280,000. Is this a less worthy job than editing the Guardian?

The campaign from print journalists seems to be that free news from the BBC is the main problem. If only this could be lobbied into history, then newspapers would suddenly have no problem. This ignores the other sources of online news which are also likely to be free. Also the BBC is the only UK brand with a major web presence, something to consider.

Getting into exposure stories on BBC expenses could start a whole new series for UK media. When Rusbridger attends Davos, what expenses are involved? Is the visit strictly necessary?

BBC helps Guardian, What About the Rest of US?

The BBC is about to lend video to newspapers including the Guardian as reported by journalism website. Maybe this will reduce the amount of moaning and groaning that carries on about the BBC. I still think they offer a decent service. I saw them working on gardening at Tatton Park, it took a lot of resource for a couple of half hour broadcasts.

Also I still think the "Digital Britain" approach has missed the aspect of the Web that it allows lots of people to contribute and add comments. There is still no recent news about the BBC inspired creative archive. I think it was Greg Dyke who presented this. Clips available for mashup and soforth. My memory is a bit random but I thought the original batch included Wizz Jones in Newquay some time ago. Wherever it came from this is now on YouTube. More recent performances by Wizz Jones are also on YouTube including one from Exeter TV. If the original content could be downloaded then more edits would be possible. The BBC could look at the archive for stuff that could be mixed with new material. This could be more like the vision and leadership that Ben Bradshaw is looking for. At the moment "Digital Britain" seems to be about finding subsidies for existing structures that are in trouble but still have enough clout to complain. Apparently ITN are complaining that the new offer will make life more difficult for them. Maybe they will be offered a slice of the licence fee as compensation. But what we need is ways to open up new possibilities.

Less Rusbridger mystery

Alan Rusbridger on the Future of Journalism from Carta on Vimeo.

seems quite close to Jeff Jarvis

What I still don't understand is why the Guardian and Observer print versions still contain so much knocking for bloggers etc. Maybe the 1000 recognised commenters are ok, then the rabble who add comment to this are sometimes too rude, and then anyone else is just outside. Guardian Talk is almost never mentioned but it is still the format where the reader chooses the subject.

Murdoch and News Organizations

According to Peter Preston things are back to confusion. Rupert Murdoch has followed his apparent call to charge for Web news by suggesting that online is the future and paper may decline.

"We think of newspapers in the old fashioned way, printed on crushed wood so to speak. It's going to be digital. Within 10 years I believe nearly all newspapers will be delivered to you digitally...But if you've got a newspaper with a great name and a great reputation and you're trusted, the people in that community are going to need access to your source of news. What we call newspapers today, I call 'news organizations' and 'journalistic enterprises,' if you will. They are the source of news. And people will reach it, if its done well, whether they do it on a Blackberry or a Kindle or a PC."

Preston is not sure how this fits with the plan to charge for the Sunday Times. How would the Times fit in? Maybe the confusion is resolved by accepting that the "news organization" possibility is much as it was before the recent talk about charging for content.

Roy Greenslade suggested the Murdoch quote could have come from Jeff Jarvis or alan Rusbridger. Not sure what to make of this. Buzzmachine has been going on about news organixations for ages but what Rusbridger thinks is a mystery.

Not much on Sony at Hay, but Google is news in New York

The print Media Guardian has not got anything I can find on what happened at Hay. Maybe this is normal. Conferences etc are to be sold before the event. Reporting what was said is not the point. Anyway Jeff Jarvis writes on the basis of actually using a Kindle and paying his own sub for the Journal ( no longer when it reached a new price level). He thinks news has changed and the idea of a branded package that can be charged for is no longer very viable. He is usually the most interesting read in the Media print. why is he always near the back?

Maybe his next book could fit with a Keynote for Online Information 2009 with a series of Twitter posts for people who can't be there.

Meanwhile there is news in the New York Times about Google claims at the BookExpo about launching a service for paid book content sometime in 2009. The Guardian has reported this, through a PDA blog. The Teleread blog hopes that the EPUB format will be in there somewhere. This is more than likely as Google seems to claim that all routes will be supported.

Draft fiction - Talabont on Usk In Your Time

Title needs changing but starts with the words that fit at the moment. So far the Hay Festival take on the sony Reader has been a big disappointment. No reporting at all of what happened. As in what was said and if anyone changed their view. All I can find online is bookish views about the dangers.

So maybe fiction is a way to think about this. Imagine two visiting citizens of the USA, loosely based on David Weinberger and Jeff Jarvis. They are staying at Talabont on Usk because Hay is full and because all my fiction has to be near a canal to fit in with another project. Jarvis is worried that his change agent role at the Guardian may damage his reputation as the print culture is fighting back and the brand is damaged. He thinks the Hay Festival could help him to understand. Weinberger is in the UK on a secret BBC project of which more later.

They spend some time near the Sony Screen, try to promote their own digital work, and most days escape to Talabont On Usk to compare notes in amazement.

Later back in London Melvyn Bragg has been asked to host a new BBC radio show called "In Your Time", extending studio discussion through audience feedback during the day. Also the topics are more recent, starting with the ClueTrain Manifesto from late in the previous century. Bragg is rather unhappy with this. The starting design is that what took three quarters of an hour as daytime radio will be edited down to half an hour in the evening but include text and voice contributions from the listeners. "I have to get up at three in the morning to appear to have read the books. Now they want me to answer the phone."

The studio guests are UK academics and the format seems to be as usual. The morning gets more difficult when it turns out that the BBC have arranged for Weinberger and Jarvis to be among the first callers. Several other people text in who claim to know something about the Cluetrain Manifesto. Bragg decides it is time to slip away to the House of Lords for some tea and a cake. Explaining his problems to some friends they come up with a solution. Why not use the red button? Editing down to half an hour was never going to work so later that day it was arranged that around 9.55 the discussion continued on Freeview. Bragg joined in for a while but later realised that the show was called "In Your Time" because the audience was doing the work.

Sorry for 2009 read 2008

It turns out the Robert McCrum feature mentioned in the previous post was actually from 2008 not 2009. No wonder I could not find it in my print versions.

So it only confirms my impression that print journalists are getting more resistant to digital as the evidence mounts up that something is changing.

Peter Preston is now writing about complexity as if everything is in flux. This may not make much sense as a story but is an advance on just being rude about bloggers.

He mentions a website where there is translation of European news. So there are still possibilities.

Sony Reader at Hay, what happened?

I just found a feature from last week by Robert McCrum. I have been doing some checking online trying to find a report on the debate at Hay about the sony Reader and digital literature. Strangely I failed to find this review of ten years of the book scene in print. Apparently it was on page 6 of the Features Section. Maybe this was the main bit maybe the Review. The Sunday Newspaper is too big to find what might be interesting. Second lot of vouchers has arrived since I took the deal for Observer as well as Guardian. Maybe I will find my way around sometime soon.

Anyway it turns out McCrum has got a view on the Sony Reader or rather the Amazon Kindle because of the wireless connectivity. He takes it as a genuine development and suggests that

The 'iPod moment' in the book world, so often postponed, is expected to happen this year, probably in the autumn.

There is even a paragraph more friendly towards the bloggers than recent remarks by Preston and Porter

Readers and writers may now experience the liberation of literature in ways that Caxton never dreamed of. The word, written and spoken, remains at the heart of our culture, but it's no longer watched by a Praetorian Guard of elite gatekeepers. It has been handed back whence it came, from the few to the many.

However there still seems to be no reporting on what was said at Hay. Sony paid some sponsorship and provided a big screen and free use of some kit. So then what happened? Was there a conclusion? I have found a blog from Mike Wood but he seems to be a book fan to start with and has yet to say wht the meeting was about.

Henry Porter writes in print about the reassuring nature of the English countryside and then wonders why the UK tends to be rather conservative. So he was at Hay also. News reporting may not be his thing at this time though presumably views on the Sony Reader will become clearer sometime later.

Here is something for bloggers and print journalists to develop together. What is being said about digital publishing? When will it seem to be sensible?

Journalism students and mobile devices

This turns up through Google Search though the G2 print report from Hay has nothing on Sony so far that I can find. Jemima Kiss reports that editor Alan Rusbridger believes that the tech journalists show the future. And the students are expected to have an iPhone or similar. But the reporting on Stanza is yet to appear and Hay seems to be still a bookish event only. So rather than get upset I think I shall just be confident about the future and hope the Guardian makes it though the current confusion. Confiding in the readers would do no harm, unless slowing things down is hoped for.

Media Guardian catches up with Sony

Today the printed Media Guardian is more or less sensible in looking at devices for reading. Mostly about the Amazon Kindle but the difference seems to be that Sony has sponsored aspects of the Hay Festival, a literary event with celebs such as Clive James.

If the use of such devices was accepted as normal there could be a new meaning for "reading", something young people no longer do according to some critics of the bloggers and twitterers etc. etc. I am trying to be constructive here and look for some common ground.

Publishing executives are watching developments carefully - sales of ebooks are growing fast, albeit from a small base. "I don't think we are approaching a tipping point quite yet," says Gail Rebuck, the chairman and chief executive of Random House. "If you look at ebook sales, they're less than 1% of turnover." There is, however, long-term potential: "Can I conceive of a world where digital reading takes up 20% or 25% of people's available reading time? Yes I can. Could it be as much as 50%? I don't know."

So let us imagine a time, a future Hay perhaps, when the legitimate publishing execs think of digital as 10% of business as usual. They would be reasonably polite about this presumably, not like Preston and Porter on a Sunday. My guess is that screen reading is already significant. Serious books and literary fiction (SBLF) have already lost display space in UK bookshops to what the Bookseller calls R&J (Richard and Judy promoted on TV). The 1% or turnover would not include the stuff found on the web for free.

By the way, USA publishers seem a bit ahead on adjusting to digital. Random House is in the UK but also in New York. Not sure where to find quotes from London publishers that make as much sense.

The Guardian story makes no mention of the EPUB format, a central feature of the Sony Reader. EPUB is based on open standards such as XHTML so in theory most web content could be packaged as EPUB. So far the promotion in Waterstones has featured some free classics as a bargain bundle but not really promoted the amount of free stuff. Feedbooks for example can deliver EPUB from a blog RSS or news feed such as the BBC or New York Times.

Also there is no mention of Stanza, recently bought by Amazon, capable of displaying EPUB on iPhone etc. Numbers are uncertain but it seems likely that software downloads are about two or three times the number for devices. Thinking about it, free is more likely than spending on another thing to carry.

No mention either for Scribd option to charge. This has an interest for writers, but maybe not for publishers who like blockbuster titles or newspapers who like one editorial printed several million times.

But this is only Monday. Thursday could bring some detail on file formats, how to load up a memory card and place in a Sony Reader. If the details of the EPUB format are a problem, text and PDF do work but maybe not with all the menu functions.

The actual big debate is not until Friday, as reported in the Bookseller

A panel discussion hosted by Sony entitled "Brave New World—Rights and Wrongs in the Digital Future" will take place on 29th May as part of the collaboration. The debate will focus on the power and management of online content and digital reading devices.

Those taking part include Steve Haber, president of digital reading business division of Sony electronics, Jamie Byng, m.d. of Canongate and PFD agent Caroline Michel. Jessica Powell of Google and Tom Berwick of Creative & Cultural Skills are also taking part.

Sony is also sponsoring a venue, the "Sony Screen", which will host events.

Gail Rebuck, chair and c.e.o. of Random House UK said: "I am terrifically excited about the impact of digital advances on the future landscape of publishing and I am already a convert to reading all our manuscripts on my Sony Reader."

You know what? This is sounding more exciting already. This imagined future where digital is part of the landscape may be closer than we think.

Still nothing in Guardian about Scribd and paid content

I still cannot find anything about Scribd and charging for content. Search on Guardian website shows nothing new, just old stuff about piracy and the strong views of Henry Porter. I am not sure how this will turn out but there could be two scenarios to keep it simple. The Buzzmachine Guardian Scenario would follow the views of consultant Jeff Jarvis, a smooth transition to a new form for a news organisation, essentially based in the Web though still with a print aspect. The audience to contribute and interact. This might work. Then there is the Preston-Porter scenario seeking subsidies for the existing model though the words business and model are not really to be used that often. Regular knocking copy for bloggers and most of the writing on the Web will presumably drive away any contribution from readers. My guess is that this scenario will just result in continuing print decline with not much happening online. Nothing is clear at the time, maybe only in versions of history. So the two scenarios are possible. The print version of the Guardian however seems to be tending towards Preston-Porter. Victor Keegan is looking at the facts but when he points out that the new wave of music companies are doing things that older companies missed out on he might then look at print publishing also.

The end of five centuries of print

Peter Preston is facing the facts, print is over. He chooses to mention the "bilious bloggers" as part of the dreadful consequences but this recent writing at least describes the actual situation for print journalists.

Can't see any responses to the comments but then this is not really expected.

The Guardian continues the Observer support for the Murdoch suggestion that content should stop being free. News organisations will change this soon.

What strikes me is how subdued is the news about the Amazon Kindle launched last week with support from the New York Times and other papers. The Guardian writes about the BBC problem as if their websites would suddenly be in profit if the BBC was closed down. The thing is, the Web is global. It would not make much difference except to lower the profile of the UK.

For detail on the Amazon Kindle, turn to the LA Times and a report from last week. Not sure if the LA Times had this in print but I can't find anything till today in the print Guardian or Observer. Today the mention was almost at the end of the story on Murdoch's views.

Some newspaper groups are believed to have had discussions with Amazon about getting their product on to the Kindle reader, a new version of which was launched in the US last week by Jeff Bezos (pictured left). But few believe these first-generation digital readers represent an iPod moment.

As the timescale of print is over five centuries the actual digital book moment may be hard to spot. But the people who pay money for the print versions of newspapers are reasonably expecting accurate reporting of news events. Whatever the opinions of the print journalists.

Still can't find Kindle news on print Guardian

Today Thursday can't find news on Kindle in print. Should be a techie day as well but all about Windows. Apparently there will still be XP but as a virtual system in something else. Can't I just stay using this current Time Machine?

Anyway, back on topic, there is a blog from Roy Greenslade but not much detail. US papers make deal with Kindle. Surely this is news?

Meanwhile BBC quotes -

Alan Rusbridger, the editor of UK newspaper The Guardian, for one, has predicted there might be an "iPod moment" for the industry with the coming of a handheld device on which reading a newspaper will become commonplace.

So there is awareness somewhere in the Guardian building, just not in the bit that writes for a print audience currently taking out subscriptions.

Thank goodness for the BBC.

Guardian blog reports Kindle

The Guardain website version includes a blog post from Bobbie Johnson about a new larger Kindle to be announced tomorrow. Apparently it may have "a larger screen that can more easily display newspaper and magazine pages... potentially giving the struggling print industry a chance to find some light at the end of the tunnel." Surely he means the news industry will have light at the end of the tunnel. Not sure how print continues as such.

Still, welcome news and good it is being reported. What will turn up in print later this week? Will it wait till Thursday?

Meanwhile Boston Globe story makes no mention of the Web. What resource is available for a switch online? When was this decided on?

Control Freaks and Local News

I am finding the Guardian and Observer harder to follow. They still come up with conflicting messages. I no longer think this is a cunning plan of some kind, just various people at different times. The result is still to make me think that bloggers and comment posters are not really that welcome.

Still, the John Naughton space on Sunday (Control freaks don't get it) had links to talks by James Boyle at the RSA and Cambridge so some cred for the idea that control can be too tight. The Wikipedia is fairly treated in this approach. There is recognition for the contribution of large numbers of people on the Web. However, discussion about local news seems to make no provision at all for the way that new forms of networking could contribute. It is all about subsidies for existing models.

Today an editorial includes another welcome for the idea of BBC funds heading towards newspapers.

For the first time since the Enlightenment, large communities - towns, cities, even small nations - face the prospect of muddling through without any verifiable source of news.

Maybe it is just me, but I guess this means that the bloggers etc are just not verifiable. Then there is another swipe at the BBC - "Who is to say that BBC3 (budget £80m) is more deserving of public funds than local news?" - that reminds me of the previous campaign that wrecked the BBC plans for local video. My own concern is to find some way of getting resource for local video. Some can be done quite easily but there is another level required. More on this in blog about wifi in Exeter.

Recently Peter Preston suggested a new set of deals for regional groups.

Give Trinity the West Midlands, north-east and Lancashire hinterland. Leave the East Midlands and south-west to Northcliffe. Let Archant keep East Anglia safe and Johnston look after Yorkshire.

Presumably Manchester is still seen as Guardian territory, not Lancashire hinterland. As a Guardian reader in Exeter I find this readiness to carve up the UK with the Daily Mail just slightly shocking but not very surprising given the way the Guardian line seems to be moving.

It is welcome that the Web offers an alternative. And of course the BBC continues not only local, but the only global UK media brand.

Education reporting

Surprised to find the Daily Telegraph is more interested than the Guardian in the Google aspects of the Jim Rose report. Starting with Google and aiming at creating a web page by age 11 is something like news I would think. Quite hidden away in the Guardian and not mentioned at all in the editorial.

Yesterday I went into rave mode on the Guardian Talk. No reporting I can find about the Amazon purchase of Stanza, actually nothing on Stanza ever. Not a lot of primary age iPhone users I don't suppose but sometimes I think print journalists are in a world of their own from some time ago when print journalism was safer.

However, the Education Editor answers the comments sometimes. Very welcome. Maybe the Guardian staff will turn up on Guardian Talk.

Lenny Henry and the YouTube dialogue

Fairly often I try to think about how to persuade established voices to be less beastly about YouTube, bloggers, citizens in general. The stream of abuse against the claimed destruction of civilisation continues apace no matter what else happens. Proper print journalists with pages to fill through opinion probably pay not much attention to the comments sent in. So why not respond to mainstream TV instead? Asking a question is not easy for any form of journalism so maybe just raving on is one method, while looking out for something that might show a new direction.

Lenny Henry is a classic artist for peak time TV. Why he takes the approach to web video that comes over on the BBC is a bit of a mystery. Maybe he wants to insist on the role of the star in the studio. The people who produce the clips are never treated with any respect and rarely get any credit as in a namecheck. See this clip on YouTube, posted for the purpose of review and comment. Genuinely this is only there to make the point that the comments are valid. There is no taking away from the BBC of anything of value.

Lenny Henry might engage in a conversation on camera or others might comment meanwhile, BBC followers on where the advice went wrong perhaps. So my idea would be to use Morecambe as a base for discussing the role of the comedian. Is comedy socially conservative, abusing the nonconforming? Could it be more progressive?

The clips so far are to show the set, Stone Jetty as a place to meet, Rotunda to meet the stars who stay in the hotel subject to budget (offers on comments please), Winter Gardens to look back on comic history, Lubin for continued conversation and to face up to the continued losses on all things YouTube. As Lenny gets an income from current business model it may not be surprising things continue as they are. But there could also be a more creative link between online and mainstream tv.

Link to New York Times, they have a point

The Guardian, meanwhile, surely captured the Zeitgeist Prize for Journalistic Angst when it announced in an article that it would do away with its print edition and publish exclusively via Twitter, an online social network that limits written communications to 140 characters.

The Guardian said it would also transform its archives into Twitter messages, or “tweets,” employing the same shorthand that teenagers use to update their friends on important developments in their lives, like tying their shoes: “OMG Hitler invades Poland, allies declare war see tinyurl.com/b5x6e for more.”

source

Twitter story continues, not April fool day today

Today in print Guardian and blog, the Twitter story continues.

Apparently the finances of UK football are so soundly based that orchestrated Twitter feeds are not required. But the Twitter from half time has started. Makes a lot more sense than staying with the TV for the ads.

The Guardian joke included the idea that anyone can post news. However, this is true and continues to be true. I think the plausibility of the idea that a newspaper would close down print is significant and means this was a day to remember. Not that print will vanish anytime soon, but the web also has some credibility.

Local Media near Exeter

Guardian editorial today about local news. They claim there could be no reliable source of information without print journalists. I do understand there is a problem but it is disturbing that they do not recognise the model of citizen journalism. Still a lot of negativity towards bloggers in my opinion. Peter Preston in the Observer mentioned the views of Polly Toynbee and pointed out the significance of her interest in this topic. It must be getting important.

I don't think they would read it if I left a comment about the OhmyNews business model. The Guardian Talk never has any response from Guardian staff. Probably they are very busy. So I think adding a "pollytoynbeelocal" tag may eventually get some interest. Jeff Jarvis responded to a story in OhmyNews but rarely adds to my comments on Buzzmachine. Why would he, given his heavy workload. this blog is updated every so often but somehow Jeff manages to Twitter as well as updating Buzzmachine etc. I think he may be wrong to assume that all writing needs as little subbing as his own. OhmyNews invests in editors to work with citizen reporters. Needs more study by guardian etc. but i am just repeating myself. Long list of examples of disturbing views in print could follow but maybe later.

Meanwhile in Exeter Youtube is getting stronger. I think there is enough material for stories about technology, music and animation. Where detail is missing the audience can find it for themselves. For example "A2D09" in YouTube.

More dissonance

Two contrasting views in the Media section today. Jeff Jarvis has extra space to describe his new book about Google and the benefits of opening up to the audience. However, with even more space and a few pages closer to the cover is another lament for the unfortunate print columnist who is obliged to endure comments.

I may have mentioned this before but I think the tone of conversation would be better if Guardian staff joined in the threads on Guardian Talk. I doubt they even look at it except to delete stuff. The thread on the PDF version of the Guardian includes a detailed complaint from a paying customer. If she has been contacted offline she has not mentioned it.

As far as I know this is the first review of the Jeff Jarvis book to appear in the Guardian. Well, a sort of review maybe it fails to count as such if written by the author. Chance of a mention on a Saturday? Very low I would think. More likely to get a proper auther moaning on about how book sales are dropping off and there are too many bloggers about.

"Everything Is Miscellaneous" by David Weinberger has still not been reviewed in the Guardian. Not published in the UK so that extra editorial filter is still missing. But there is no obvious reason not to review "Whst Would Google Do?"

Editorial on YouTube

The editorial on media and broadband makes a lot of sense. YouTube has a major role in public broadcasting. I have started to notice more local reporting and also I have spent a lot of time checking out the music around the inauguration. Not sure why it was hard to find on UK TV. The BBC presenters chose to speak over the chamber music so I gave up on them. Sky was better, but much more content on YouTube.

The "debate" seems to be about how to find new money to prop up old systems. Nothing I can find about resources for citizen reporting, user content or whatever it may be called. Again YouTube could help here. They have the volume and the systems to support niche communities and to store content over time. I find with the Guardian that on Talk topics are deleted too quickly for themes to develop. On Comment Is Free the comments seem to stop quite quickly when allowed. A new headline is then launched so it is hard to sustain a line of argument. There is scope for further change in how the Guardian approaches the Web.

Simon Jenkins at 180 degrees to reality

You have to hand it to proper print journalists for readability and amusement. The text's readability, your amusement, not sure I can even structure a sentence with a verb in it. But hey this is only a blog.

Simon Jenkins argues at length that fashion is moving back in time. The Rolling stones can still tour. There is book publishing interest in the second world war. So therefore there is new interest in newspapers as in print. I think this is the main point he was getting to. The evidence apparently is the launch of "The Printed Blog" and he suggests for authority that we Google it, not look in a library for a journal.

However, when I look at the site,the Printed Blog turns out to be nothing like a traditional newspaper. It is much more like OhmyNews who publish a free weekly in print to get wider interest in their website. It appears there is not much of a budget for the source bloggers. They will gain from interest in their websites. The jobs advertised are for some inside journalists but there also seems to be an emphasis on editing. this again is similar to OhmyNews. They concentrate resources on editors, partly to support citizen reporters with advice and training. I still think Jeff Jarvis could allow for more sub-editors, not less, in his model of a future news organisation.

So the Printed Blog is not a throwback. Print and online continue to co-exist. The Guardian is still worth 90pence in print as a curiosity but as a guide you may want to check with other sources.

Haymarket moves Marketing Direct online

Mailing shot arrived this morning by post, encloses a fairly slim magazine - Marketing Direct - and announcement that this will be online from next month, February.

So what is the Haymarket take on print? What to make of editorial in Printweek and Printing World?

Guardian reports e-books as games

I have had a good look at the books review section of the Guardian from yesterday and cannot find anything about e-books, the condition of the publishing trade or the implications for access to knowledge resources. All the blog links have gone and the Bookseller extracts also.

So I do not feel I was too sweeping in stating that the ePUB format and the clarity of e-book acceptance at Online Information have not been reported.

Meanwhile the games page in the Guide reports that Harper collins have packaged 100 classic titles for the Nintendo DS at only £19.99. Dickens, Shakespeare and the Bronte sisters with others presumably also out of copyright. Apparently "from the dustier recesses of the HarperCollins back catalogue". It may not be off topic to recall that some New York publishers never paid royalties to Dickens anyway. The comment in the Guide is that some people will be disappointed and will try to swap it for a "proper game". There are several other issues to consider. Do the schools have a duty to inform pupils about Project Gutenberg, the Internet Archive and other free sources for the classics? Literary review publications try to sell advertising to publishers but also should inform readers of what is on offer. Sony also claim "free" titles as a benefit for the Sony Reader but promotion in Waterstones fails to mention other free stuff available. The cost of the Sony Reader is enough to put a lot of people off so information on savings is relevant. There is also publishing scene around Creative Commons ideas and the Feedbooks service creating ePUB from blogs and RSS.

Last week the guide covered "Pop" as distinct from literature etc as found in the Review. It will be interesting to see how this works out over time. "Pop" might include anything on a portable device while the critics only recognise hardback books.

Perhaps the HarperCollins package includes some software but this could still be free. Stanza for the iPhone/iPod is being downloaded in larger numbers that the Kindle is delivered. Similar free software for existing mobile devices may be a large part of the scene around e-books, however described. Maybe the Guardian will report this on a Thursday.

Digital Planet and the death of culture

Trying to remember what I heard during the night on the BBC World Service. Usually this is part of going back to sleep again. During the holiday this was a bit of a blur anyway. Pretty sure this is a text version -

Internet critic Andrew Keen this month launches the new edition of his book The Cult of the Amateur – How Today’s Internet is Killing our Culture.

In it, he claims that, ‘MySpace and Facebook are creating a youth culture of digital narcissism; the cacophony of anonymous blogs is deafening today’s youth to the voices of informed experts and professional journalists.’

Solana Larsen disagrees. She is managing editor of Global Voices Online, which publishes the best blogs from around the world.

They join Gareth for a discussion about the affect blogs and social networks are having on global culture.

I am jumping about a bit, but why Andrew Keen again? The Guardian has not reviewed at all the book "Everything is Miscellaneous" by David Weinberger. Nothing against Solana Larsen or bloggers, just asking why the literary world ignores a book? Maybe Digital Planet is not as respectful of a book as most of the BBC. Not sure about this but the tone of the introduction for Andrew Keen suggested to me that there is some special form of regard.

Stronger claims for bloggers this year

Getting back to normal life post holiday. Studying the Guardian for example. They are interested in the Web. The hard copy version claims that most news still comes from newspapers. But I can't find that bit in the online version. This just reports that newspapers are not the trusted source of news you might expect from some arguments about the danger to civilisation if print circulation continues to decline.

I think this year will feature some more rudeness about citizen journalism. The chances of most UK news organisations changing their methods to really welcome public engagement is pretty low. Hope I am wrong about this.

My own reporting for OhmyNews is standing up quite well to later events. The stories from people who are not professional journalists can be based on particular interests or niche knowledge. I have now done two stories about the ISO survey to show that certificates indicate a stronger base in China and then some decline in US/UK.

Also I think that e-books are not reported enough on the literary pages, for example the Guardian on a Saturday. This section just carries on as a print item. They dropped the blogging extracts. Very little about the Kindle or Sony Reader. They could cover the changes in forms of writing.

OhmyNews have published my three stories on the ePUB format, Penguin support for ePUB, and the Online Information show.

I think the Online Information event was an adequate base for e-books to flourish in the UK. There was a supplement in the Guardian ahead of the event but no reporting I remember on what happened. Probably around the time of the London Book Fair there will be some more on the dangers for culture of all this blogging stuff and predictions that the printed book will never change. Maybe they will report on what has already happened. The Sony Reader in the UK is about three years later than the model for Japan.

Carnage Scenario for UK newspapers

OhmyNews have published my story based on a recent talk by Emily Bell.

The background of falling print circulations is widely assumed and understood.

Some UK newspapers have not got very far with their websites. the news organisations that make a transition to being mostly web based will presumably change their culture enough to be more or less accepting of what happens online.

Future posts will look at some numbers. At the moment the circulation figures are for print or web and make no sense at all of where each organisation is at.

A poll about regional newpapers

Recently the question was asked, which regional UK paper group will go bust first. no answer was offered and it is an unlikely outcome. But which is in most difficulty? Some solution will be found. I think I can add a poll so will give it a try.

Imagined reader proposal

I would like to suggest a whatif from some time in the future. Say the Guardian guarantees £500 million over five years for Man Roland to develop a device with a screen size like the Berliner or G2 in colour of course and with Web access. Guardian fans sign a 24 month contract to spend around a pound a day and get a free prototype.

I could develop a detailed proposal on a modest budget if one could be found. Not too silly. Man Roland already has some research.

From Guardian Talk

Print version in actual Guardian

Guardian Technology has printed an extract from my blog about reading the Guardian. Yes, that is correct, the words are in print, letters page equivalent. They have chosen a section where I am polite about a proper print journalist, Victor Keegan and his writing about the Sony Reader.

I realise two main things from this so far. If I was a bit more creative and positive in my writing it may not put people off right away. and secondly this Sony Reader is more of a talking point than first appeared. It cannot be long before the Guardian writers for Monday, Tuesday and Saturday get involved.

This week Victor Keegan is writing about citizens in virtual worlds. He mentions he has an apartment in virtual Berlin courtesy of Twinity. I hope to visit one day and discuss citizen journalism etc. Maybe I will end up talking to somebody else but it works as a project. So far I have failed to install Twinity but I have found a YouTube video so have faked a photo with an avatar from Second Life.



Steve Ingram, the avatar in the picture, is one of the reporters for Rougemont Global Broadcasting, usually based near the Apple Store in Exeter. He is the sort of person to explore new and interesting ideas.

If I do manage to load Twinity and get to Berlin I think one clue could be to look for Shakespeare and / or monkey. These words often turn up in Victor Keegan projects. I am not sure he allows random creation a fair chance. While waiting for the virtual London there could be scope on Flickr for a guide to most streets, starting near Trafalgar Square.

Web Triumph Day

Jeff Jarvis is too apologetic. He worries about being behaving as the "internet triumphalist" but he thinks that "somebody has to". He tries to counteract a number of fears and complaints that won't go away. "There are inaccuracies on the internet" ; "Bloggers aren't journalists" ; "People are rude on the internet" . By the way a few pages on there is a jolly funny take on what a citizen journalist might say - "the blogosphere thrives on abuse and invective.."

Anyway, back on topic, Jeff Jarvis refuses to make a claim for the internet as if it is like other media, "packaged and perfected". He prefers to see it as part of life, something messy. However when material from his Buzzmachine blog turns up later in the Guardian print version it seems to be a lot closer to normal media. Maybe it is the effect of Guardian subeditors. Maybe the comments on the blog help to add some texture and scrutiny.

the aim today is to respond to fears and complaints" once and for all. I would like to go a bit further and just accept that the Web has arrived alongside print as part of media. I find the Guardian is still often avoiding this as an issue. Parts of the paper do not hang together.

Jane Martinson writes an opinion on how the numbers for newspapers "are not good and will get worse before they get better", I cannot find any mention of websites or "news organisations". How will the numbers get better without including the Web in the same conversation? On another page Mike Butcher considers the ABCe numbers for August. ( Audited circulation with the e after as not in e-learning) The Independent site up 90% on the previous August, compared to 24% fall over two years in full-price print circulation, according to Jane Martinson. However there is almost never any discussion of what the thinking is about a transition from print to the web. Is print still a cash cow? Where is the investment? How many newspaper managers believe they could concentrate on video?

There was a time when the Saturday Guardian had a section similar to a staff blog. This explained some of what was in progress. It was dropped for a Readers Page all of which is written by proper print journalists except the headlines apparently. My suggestion would be for the readers to have more space but accept that editors know more about headlines. this, by the way, is the approach at OhmyNews, where Guardian staff might visit sometime and make a study of citizen journalism.

Getting back to my main point, it seems to me that the Guardian is not really reporting what is happening with news organisations, or letting the readers of either paper or web pages know of where it is going.

One more example of the mess and muddle. Victor Keegan has written on a Thursday about the potential for a future reading device similar to the Sony but with internet access, larger screen and so on. The Saturday bookish bit has stopped taking copy from blogs and also stopped the news feed from the Bookseller. So it continues as flat pages increasingly unconnected in my opinion. The first mention of the Sony Reader I can remember came last Saturday from Andrew Lycett. Once Amazon and the Kindle appear in the UK, there could be a danger for print publishers. Add this to the list, please, Jeff Jarvis.

Most of the Guardian, print version especially, has become a series of examples of contradictions. Online there is some acceptance for "user generated content" and the idea that the Web has arrived. In print the bloggers are often insulted as if they are a different set of people. The printed words of Jeff Jarvis are a welcome exception. It is also worth the extra work involved in making sense of the blog version on Buzzmachine.

Victor Keegan investigates

Proper print journalist Victor Keegan has made a trip to Cambridge before offering an opinion about the Sony Reader and other devices. Good for him. It makes the cost of a newspaper seem cheap, even if they did skip the ICT bit last week.

The theme of where newspapers are at could turn up again on a Monday.

Add "editor" to Jeff Jarvis diagram

I found this again

Intj0808pdf

View SlideShare presentation or Upload your own. (tags: cuny journalism)

I would like to redraw the diagram on the news process with an editor in there somewhere. Citizen Journalism as found at OhmyNews relies on editors but somehow Jeff Jarvis is on another route it seems.

Also there could be some sort of loop. Often the stories I write are repeats of previous ones.

ICT vanishes from print version of Guardian

This week there was a supplement for a trade show instead of the normal Technology section on mostly computers and the Web. The topic was interesting enough but i think we should have been warned that the normal content was missing before we parted with the 80p.

Let us hope this was an unusual event, not part of a trend. Previously this would have been a supplement. Sadly the print version is becoming something I look at to follow how the Guardian is behaving rather than a source of news.

Meanwhile the blogs etc. continue.

Presentation mode ahead of September 4th

Here is a presentation for sept 4th when there should be several Sony Readers in Exeter. There are a couple of links to Guardian Talk so this is now part of a read / write web / newspaper.

epub is news

The Observer has a couple of pages on e-books but seems to have missed the news last week that the Sony Reader will support the EPUB format as well as Adobe Digital Editions. EPUB is XML and more or less open. As reported by Tech Gadgets in India.

Print journalists may be too busy making jokes about bloggers to include this sort of information. Newspapers face some difficult issues but their readers can only relate to this situation through communication of an actual situation.

Unedited story for OhmyNews

Citizen Journalism is something to consider and then write about

Reading the Observer and the Guardian out of time sequence at the moment. Today I bought an Observer for the Wireless supplement inspired by Carphone Warehouse. Interesting to see several aspects in one section. The Guardian Education pages rarely cover technology as such. There is a section on South Korea and the available bandwidth, roughly 100 where the UK is 4 as reported though my own latest number is 2.4 on the screen. Recently I was catching up with recent Guardians and it turns out that the humour take on citizen journalism continues. See also 'I don't think bloggers read' for the serious version. When will there be a UK review or print interview with David Weinberger? Not in the Guardian one would guess.

Anyway back on topic, here is a short extract from the supposed blog of a supposed citizen journalist, ( try to remember this is supposed to be funny) -

As I mentioned last week, I bring to citizen journalism not just a fierce sense of natural justice and a brand new iPhone, but also a wealth of experience in MSM (that's mainstream media) as both a reporter and the victim of a sustained bullying campaign by subeditors who thought the truth began and ended with the proper use of the subjunctive. Back then the dinosaurs ruled the Earth, but those days, my new media colleagues, are over.

This seems to me to be completely misinformed about the role of editors in citizen journalism. Maybe it is just a flight of fancy anyway but for what it is worth here yet again is my take on what I think is the case. OhmyNews has made an investment in editing as part of their model on how citizen journalism works. Have a look at the site and check the recent conference.

Editor Brand Dissonance

The printed Guardian today strikes me as most odd, probably at the limits of what they can live with as a take on print culture. The banner at the top of the front page is about reading books, why do people rarely finish them, what can be done? The text more or less ignores the web till it gets to the end and a reference to "crib sheets" on Wikipedia. Actually I did not read the whole set of words and I guess I am not alone in this. The idea that a book should be read page by page in the order that the author decided is just unreasonable.

Then at the bottom of the page is the claim that the Guardian website is reaching new levels of readership. As the Guardian gets to be more online there will surely come a point when some acceptance of web culture will be more evident, possibly including a positive reference to the Wikipedia.

Web version of text, missing the G2 cover graphic.

More about wifi in Exeter and this week

I have written in the "wifi Exeter" blog about Victor Keegan and the mobile phone company coverage of the UK.

Round about now, things I have been supporting and proposing seem to be happening anyway. Maybe not in Exeter or even the UK, but somewhere.

The Guardian is gradually coming to terms with digital forms of the book. An editorial this week offered some scope for e-books etc. However I am not sure they recognise how much text and image exists already. The Saturday Review seems to be going in reverse. The bloggers have been banished even from the inside back page.

So the implications for newspaper publishing may not be reported so clearly. There is still not much discussion of citizen journalism. Well, actually none I can remember from this year.

But the editorial "bookmarking the future" shows some sort of moment when things shift.

Sadly the Web is not well linked in to the Education bit. There was a supplement on "stealth learning" this week but this cannot be found online. Please correct me if this is a wrong statement. Sponsored by Futurelab so maybe this is not regarded as part of the longterm archive. But I found the content more interesting than the article on adult education which was fair enough about the cuts and soforth but failed to mention that adults now use the web for hobbies and learning. The formal educational system has not got much of an offer in certain respects but the Web is stronger than ever. Where is this reported? Is there such a thing as "stealth learning for grown-ups".

Doing a Google to try to find the Futurelab content I discovered a blog where "stealth learning" is being developed as a new academic subject. Yes, really. So something like this will make the Guardian website eventually.

Emily Bell wants a conversation about the BBC

Emily Bell wants to "start a conversation" about the BBC and how to solve the problems of other media.

This is perhaps an over-dramatic response from a direct competitor. For, although small, the nature of the Guardian's business is the same as the BBC's, thanks to convergence. Indeed, Paul Myners, who chairs the Guardian's parent company board, complained to the House of Lords select committee last week that the BBC carrying advertising in overseas territories on its website might pose a significant business problem for us.

The decline in newspapers' readership has been as inexorable as the erosion of the Antarctic ice shelf, and a bit more glare will see the titles topple at penguin-killing speed. The internet has thrown some of these businesses a bit of a lifeline, but, here again, the BBC has the funds and the history and the distribution to always be ahead.

You know what? I think the transition for news organisations from paper to the Web is a larger problem than can be solved just by raiding the BBC resources. The Adobe webcast tomorrow is likely to be a significant event in the move to web video. Newspapers would do well to think about their own direction.

To be fair, towards the end of the comment Emily Bell considers whether the BBC should include advertising for other media, not just hand over cash for the Channel 4 salaries. This seems much more sensible. There is only one global brand based in the UK, the BBC.

Rusbridger returns to Davos blogging

Alan Rusbridger is in Davos and appears to be blogging disguised as comment on Comment is Free.

I put in a comment as question-

My comment is off topic but that is my point.

Last year Davos blogs from Guardian writers included a take on citizen journalism, convergance, future business models, retraining for people educated through print. Things like that.

This seems to be missing this year. Have the news organisations finished adjusting so there is nothing more to discuss?

I write stories for OhmyNews, based in Korea. They invest in editors so the effect of "citizen journalism" is different to the reports in print.

The Guardian has mentioned "The Cult of the Amateur" a few times but only Jeff Jarvis has linked to "Everything is Miscellaneous" by David Weinberger. (Links on Buzzmachine) Published in New York, available through Amazon UK. Why is this?

Last year there was mention of video as a future expense, possibly taking the Guardian back into losses even though a text web version is now viable. Any update on this? Can't see much video at the moment.

The Reader's Editor has determined that research on Facebook is ok for journalists. So comment is free text may be copied to a blog. Warning fair.

No response so far. I may have mentioned this before but my impression so far is that Guardian writers have not really understood what "the conversation" is about. They write their piece as normal for print. The public add comments. Then they do nothing except maybe write something else about how the public can be rude. A feeling of isolation and sense deprivation is no help in this. Meanwhile on Talk there is much more communication as i find it. Guardian staff could join in but never do.

Rusbridger did respond last year but that was when Davos covered media and online collaboration. Not a topic this year apparently. Maybe the "mainstream media" have stopped worrying.

Moving some of learn9 here

Yesterday there was a conference on Networked Journalism. My impression is that this has started a conversation about journalism which includes bloggers, citizen reporters etc. Quite how will only become clear over time, including the material from the day appearing online. Search tag netj.

Recently I have been putting material about journalism into the learn9 blog, which is supposed to be about learning and quality. There seem to be similar discussions about authority and grassroots knowledge when discussing both academic writing and journalism. Breaking down the discipline barrier between quality and learning has been important for me but I think this now obvious. Or at least there is sufficient online discussion that crosses over, whether it is recognised by academics or not.

I still think the Guardian has a long way to go in adjusting to the web. Jeff Jarvis is a genuine blogger but the print Guardian still includes knocking copy about the web, mostly written by proper journalists.

So there could be more about that in this blog but not in learn9.

Little Richardjohn - draft review

Discussion continues on Guardian blogging talk. I think the current suggestion is to do reviews for the common ownership of link promotion. Here are some notes, may do a tighter version later.

--------

Contributes historical perspective to topics such as "11 year old shot dead in pub car park". I have not read all 412 posts but it seems to be about the welfare state as something we have lost.

LittleRichardjohn - 02:24pm Sep 3, 2007 GMT (#413 of 447)

So Blair was socialist? That makes even less sense.

We're gradually paring down this 50 year experiment to a realistic few months after 1845.

This 1845 probably means 1945, so people assume

Yamnaya - 02:27pm Sep 3, 2007 GMT (#416 of 447)

"We're gradually paring down this 50 year experiment to a realistic few months after 1845."

Its true, the Welfare State ceased to exist in June 1946.

About tea time.

LittleRichardjohn uses few words to ask the righ question. On another topic-

Vanishing England

LittleRichardjohn - 02:26pm Sep 3, 2007 GMT (#133 of 142)

When was 'England'

New Readers Start Here

http://mediatalk.guardian.co.uk/WebX/.775e8504/25?14@blog@

think that's it

so follow this LINK


Not sure exactly how this will develop but there is some support for an independent critic of the Guardian Unlimited Talk project.

What I think is that the Guardian editorial policy cannot continue to both claim to be moving online and also rubbish bloggers in print. See my forthcoming book "Editorial Brand Dissonance".

The Talk is fairly close to what online should be, except that the Guardian staff do not join in. I have started topics on PDF and OhmyNews which both relate to the Guardian and would have benefited had they contributed information. It is just wierd that there is one section in which they say nothing and then "Comment is Free" in which they may or may not respond to comments. There used to be a section on Saturday in print where there was some explanation of what was happening online. This has stopped. The "Reader's Page" is actually written by professional journalists. The readers appear to choose the headlines. On OhmyNews the editors choose the headlines and sometimes change the suggestions from citizen reporters. this makes more sense to me as a way of working. I think the Guardian should get some accurate information on how the editing is done in citizen journalism. There could be a better result, both online and in print.

Guardian talk - media-newmedia-why blog?

This is getting interesting

more later

Guardian outsources to USA for blogger opinion

Scott Rosenberg has some space in the print Guardian today. All the examples he gives are from the USA. My guess is that this article was written for a US audience and then the Guardian repeated it.

Nothing wrong with that, but there is still a lack of positive articles about blogging from actual Guardian staff. As far as I can tell, I may have missed some.

So maybe this is ok. If there is agreement in the US that blogging etc. are part of the mix, then this will be accepted in the UK. Jeff Jarvis is mentioning a conference coming up on October 10th. Not sure where but presumably more will appear on Buzzmachine.

Suggest Victor Keegan, Marina Hyde, Simon Jenkins etc. follow online and add comments.

Allowing for print deadlines

Maybe I have been too unreasonable in expecting Guardian media print version to reflect Buzzmachine from last week. The "wack a curmudgeon" post was on the 23rd. Most people expect some rest over the UK August Bank Holiday. So maybe more will turn up in about a fortnight.

A Jay Rosen moment

The Guardian is still annoying as the print journalists seem to have had a groupthink about knocking the web.

"Ever since Al Gore invented it in whatever year the anonymous Wikipedia contributor insists he did, the internet has been hailed as a sort of algorithm that produces a new utopia each time it is fed back into itself."

Marina Hyde on Saturday

Actually the Wikipedia starts with ARPANET around 1969.

So should I do another post about how surprising it is that "Everything is Miscellaneous" has yet to be reviewed in the Guardian so far as I know given all the stuff about amateurs not checking facts?

Monday was media day and another surprise. The Jeff Jarvis print selection from Buzzmachine failed to include anything about Jay Rosen and his advice to Michael Skube, a "contrarian-come-lately" who has attacked blogs in the LA Times. Rosen said it was time for Skube to retire. “I’m serious. You’re an embarrassment to my profession, to the university where you teach, and to the craft of reporting you claim to defend. It is time for you to quit, as you’ve clearly called it quits on learning— and reporting.”

As not yet repeated in Guardian print, Jarvis adds "That’s that".

and also

I’ve said it before and I hope we can stop saying it soon, but this is not a matter of ‘or’ but ‘and’: Rather than one tribe of reporters attacking the other, we can and should be working together to report more than ever.

Alan Rusbridger, editor of the Guardian, was reported as being "relaxed" about the idea of the newspaper becoming web only. If this started to happen there would need to be some clarity from the journalists. I do not understand how they could be seen as part of the web given the views on blogs and citizen journalism that are expressed in print. Claims to be an 'editor brand' result in disbelief and dissonance.

Moo ok, thank goodness for print journalists

Just as I was beginning to despair of print journalists ( Victor Keegan joining in the knocking of citizen journalism) on the opposite page is news of a print service for cards from Flickr. Moo turns out to be ok. I must have missed it even though I look at Flickr quite often. The link is there quite clearly as I now realise. So the printed version of the Guardian can complement the web. Print survives through sensible use of the web, in this case. Surely print journalists can do the same?

Reflective weekend

Sunday lunchtime. Unusually I have bought an Observer. Usually the Saturday Guardian is enough for the weekend. And I am still staring at the Friday examination of e-books.

Andrew Marr asks "Is this the future of reading?" and eventually concludes that the e-book is arriving and eventually somebody will buy one. Meanwhile he explains that 'Start the Week' on Radio 4 is still based on books and that "all my life I've somehow assumed that simply owning books like Tully's (on India) , or the Stalin biography, made me a better person."

He is less kind about newspapers. "In our house, every day we get mounds of newsprint, much of it thrown instantly away." Apparently he has the BBC online news "flickering in the corner much of the time".

However there was no sign of this on BBC1 earlier this morning. He was clutching Sunday newspapers as he announced the agenda of guests looking through the Sunday newspapers. The TV screen was on furniture holding books, not DVDs. Maybe there is a computer screen round the corner, but the newspaper is still the prop of choice.

One downside of this is that any judges watching the BBC may continue to believe that the London newspapers are significant. The decision to ban UK media from mentioning Al Jazeera and a recent trial in the same report is clearly not able to block internet discussion about UK policy. More on this in the Froomkin fan blog.

I recently went through old copies of the Guardian I was unable to read at the time. I don't know when it ended but there was once a review that included books together with music and film etc. My current guess is that the move to a books only review will later be seen as reactionary. Why is there a separated world of literary authority?

There is a mention of blogs in the Saturday Review. Sarah Crown is credited at the end of her blog selection as editor of Guardian Unlimited Books and then there is a link to the blog. This is in six point type.

By contrast the Observer Review has a section for books at the back, after the films and music. The Browser's column ends with a plug for guardian.co.uk/books in bold type, maybe 14pt, certainly bigger than most text. It may be all the pop culture that allows a context for this. Paperbacks reviewed include 'The Long Tail' so web ideas are considered. "Sales of bestsellers have slumped by as much as 25%, threatening the basic economics of traditional book and music stores."

The paperback reviews from Saturday include a contentious remark. Nicholas Lezard reports that after writing about Tintin for the Guardian's arts blog "one of the ill-mannered vermin who infest cyberspace posted a comment saying that I had disgracefully copied every idea from the book under review." The world of literary criticism is often more polite. For reasons explained in the blog roundup. Ysabeau Wilce is so aware of the agony and work involved in writing that "if i love a book, you'll hear about it here. But if I hate a book, you will not."

Possibly this kindness could be extended to the people who add comments on the Guardian website.

Tim Brooks, Guardian MD, recently told Revolution "When we first started the site's Comment Is Free section, there was internal resistance. The journalists said 'what? we're actually going to let the readers come back to us in the comments column?' And when the comments started coming back, some of them hostile, that reaction only intensified."

So this online stuff has been imposed on the journalists. My impression is that they would prefer the Saturday Review style of format to continue indefinitely.

My own response is to spend more time on blogging. I will continue to post comments on Guardian Talk ( as will787, my own name had gone) but don't expect any response from Guardian staff. I still find Talk is better than Comment from my point of view as the topic stays open and there is more choice over the agenda.

Anti-Americanism

Perhaps there is a better way of expressing a view on the US Presidency. Jeff Jarvis on occasion refers to "anti-Americanism" as if this is something found only outside the United States. At this time it seems that opposition to the Iraq war is more explicit in US media than in the UK. It is possible to criticise the policy of George W. Bush without being anti American, in my opinion. Next week there may be a UK trial under the Official Secrets Act that may be about a conversation between George W. Bush and Tony Blair. It is surprising to me how little this is reported, even by those who take an interest in press freedom around the globe. If there was a similar trial coming up in China, my guess is that something would have already appeared on Buzzmachine.

Attempting Dialogue

The Guardian seems to have stopped mentioning citizen journalists but is having a go at the bloggers, possibly the same people in many cases.

An attempt to encourage civility has resulted in Guardian printed statements suggesting that the comments on blogs are often insulting. Personally my impression is that most online discussion is a lot calmer than it used to be.

What I do notice is an editorial policy from the Guardian and other print-based organisations to rubbish what is already online while moving towards much of the same as fast as possible. Now, was that too sweeping a statement?

Tim Dowling writes

"In the course of that research I branched out, seeking out the online detractors of journalists with higher profiles than myself. This was my introduction to the blogosphere: a seemingly intemperate, foul-mouthed, grotesquely misogynistic community where no one can spell and everyone is blessed with a surfeit of time."

This extract is reasonably representative. Dowling's research method has been to look for references to himself and other print journalists. The qualifier "seemingly" is used, but the words "intemperate, foul-mouthed and misogynistic" are clearly his own. There is also a quote from a random source who happens to have written a book.

"It tends to be self-referential and obscure," says Andrew Keen, whose book The Cult of the Amateur: How Today's Internet Is Killing Our Culture is published in June. "And irrelevant. I mean, who cares? It's absurd. It reflects the intellectual bankruptcy of the blogosphere that things have degenerated to this level."

Yeah, right. Self-referential as in searching on your own name and then complaining at length about the mixed results.

Is it possible that any print journalist would find anything on the web from which they would expect to learn something?

As I mentioned on Guardian Talk it seems to me that the words from Tim O'Reilley and Jimmy Wales suggest some positive action from people who run blogs or other web sites. Something to ease discussion. Yet it is rare for there to be any response on Comment is Free to the points made in comments. I am not sure that all the people who write for the Guardian actually like the idea of their words going online. They may not have chosen to leave the safety of print.

So my idea is a new logo. It may get some traffic for this blog. OK so I post so rarely it is not surprising that nobody checks it. Still, my suggestion is that blogs are about attempting dialogue. The abuse happens when this fails. So the remedial task is to support dialogue, not just counter the flack.





The other logos are included. Right click and save as you like I think. There is not yet an ISO standard in civility, as far as I know.

The evidence for a formal Guardian policy on mixing messages is not in the form of a smoking gun but I first got disturbed around the time of Davos this year. In the almost festive context there was much online discussion about online etc. Jeff Jarvis invited questions for example. What about the UK Official Secrets Act Jeff? Is it just there to protect your President? Ok you don't have to get into the mess that is the UK but anyway back on topic more or less the print views from Jackie Ashley seemed out of sync with what had happened online, including posts from the Guardian editor that were more or less a blog.

Is there a print equivalent of a troll?

At the risk of still seeming a bit grumpy over the season of goodwill, it seems to me that the attack on cyberspace may be the result of the editor of the Guardian setting up a troll. The print comment is in more or less complete opposition to the direction the web discussion has been going in. During last year Jeff Jarvis managed to leak the text of a couple of statements bu Alan Rusbridger that placed the Guardian as aware of social software and citizen journalism. it seemt to me that most of the print coverage of these issues is intended to keep the readers in a print world for as long as possible. If 2007 is not to continue in confusion it would be helpful if the Guardian made some clear statements on what they think they are doing. Such clarity would only be achieved through print, naturally.