Streaming music, maybe the web is one way to find it

Some links

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/18/books/review-in-every-song-ever-ben-ratliff-helps-the-listener-discern.html?_r=0


http://www.fsgworkinprogress.com/2016/02/expanded-ways-of-listening/


http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/category/music/popcast-music/

based on print version of Guardian today, here is link to web page
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/feb/19/slave-to-the-algorithm-how-music-fans-can-reclaim-their-playlists-from-spotify


thing is, the popcast is only about three minutes in and they start complaining about different versions of YouTube uploads so the stats are not comparable. Why do they need this info? Are they part of a community where opinion is shared? through likes or attention or suggestions?

Not the sort of aspect that ever comes over in Guardian print. If the message is DEPEND ON THE CRITIC IN PRINT IGNORE THE WEB then this means you can review your own book

seems a good idea I will think on

YouTube now getting same treatment as Citizen Journalism some years ago

My blogging has moved into LinkedIn Pulse where it gets some sort of audience. Now I am linking back to the original blogs which I left for tweets and soforth. Pulse posts are a form of blogging but you have to appear as a sort of consultant / objective comment. You can't just rave about whatever annoys you at the time. Or at least you have to wrap it up.

My most recent post is about a remix of Guardian story about OU. They start with the closures of local support centres in the UK. The background about the MOOC model and Futurelearn in particular is towards the end though I think this is the news and has a lot of positive aspects, well worth reporting.

I had thought I was a bit blunt but now today I read in the Guardian a view of YouTube in the context of public service broadcasting -

Before they started at secondary school two years ago, my older children regularly read the sports pages over breakfast or cuddled up to watch The X Factor on a Saturday night. Nowadays, they constantly scroll through Instagram and YouTube on phones that appear to have been grafted on to their fingers. The biggest threat to public service television is there, live and kicking, in my front room.
Where do they get their news from? Or learn about the world? Surely not just from videos of how to paint nails in ever weirder ways, or from vlogs on how to beat their mates at imaginary football games?
Their ability to make and share video content or communicate with their friends and the world beyond is infinitely greater than mine ever was. But just how good, for want of a better word, is that content? Does it make them better citizens as opposed to just bigger consumers with a lot more choice? 

This seems to me to be totally inaccurate as a description of what YouTube is. I find loads of content from universities. For example weekly updates from a Monash MOOC.  It reminds me of the way citizen journalism was mocked in Guardian media jokes a while ago. My guess is that things will change. Before too long the Guardian will offer courses at £49 a time about how your university can best use YouTube for content marketing.

I will try to swap tweets with David Puttman. I resist joining in the Guardian professional networks when there is still no reasonable explanation of how Guardian Talk came to be trashed. Our contribution could just vanish at any time. Jane Martinson claims that the Guardian networks can help to replace the decline in public service broadcasting for education.  Not sure about this, and no reason to knock YouTube as part of the promotion. By the way, Jam from the BBC was quite a good idea and the newspapers that blocked it have not really filled the space. Just my opinion.

Could someone at the Guardian spend half a day actually looking at YouTube and report on what they find? Please stop the nonsense. No good will come of it.

Digital Literacy, the Guardian and the BBC not at BETT

The Guardian is campaigning this week around Digital Literacy.

This is timed to coincide with BETT. and is supported by Google.

Thing is, some time ago the BBC did a lot for digital literacy. I say this not only because they gave away pots of Jam. The BBC micro is well known. Then the Guardian and others claimed that the BBC was unfair competition with other offers of content for schools.

So the BBC stopped attending BETT. My guess is that Google will have a stand with some buzz. So there is a shift to globalize the scene. BETT is in London but you might not notice much UK specific. The archives don't have enough budget to have a stand. Don't remember one last year.

Still, I will buy a print Guardian tomorrow. I almost added online support to their website. Then I remembered what happened to Guardian Talk. I still think this was a disaster. As a social media network ten years or so ahead of time it was just ignored then dumped. A lot of digital literacy is about culture and I'm not sure GMG gets it.

Joss Stone PDF backup from Guardian Talk, a direct link

http://bit.ly/gyU8V0

Oh dear, the PDf includes a form for adding to the Talk. Obviously now a complete waste os space but I don't know how to delete it. So Acrobat.com invites you to download the form, can't be done embedded in Blogger. so try the direct click.

More rescued from Guardian mess soon, not sure about the format.

#guardiantalk testing code, a techie speaks

I think the closure of Guardian Talk is a major event. It may be the point in time when a news organisation failed to transition from print to web. Time will tell.

What I think is this is a disaster. They just don't get it. @arusbridger talks about mutuality and transparency. At least he answers a tweet on a Saturday, but just to say there will be a thread on a Monday. this is after everything is deleted on Friday.

And nothing in print. We know from the phone hacking stories that print journalists have a selective view on what is news. For reporting social media the guardian is shown to be as reliable as any other paper.

They seem to think that if Tweet explanation stops there will gradually be a collective memory loss. Seems unlikely to me. How to find the Guardian on Facebook is just an invitation to go away.

Martin Belam is continuing to comment

MartinBelam
1 March 2011 10:24AM
Mind you, I think Martin has taken things in good humour, all things considered.

In fairness, I tend to mumble my job title when I introduce myself. It is fine at conferences full of similar webby types, but not so good at parties...

"What do you do?"

"I work at The Guardian"

"Oh, are you a journalist?"

"No, I'm *mumbles incomprehensible job title*"

[Tumbleweed]

Maybe that is it. The journalists don't really value the tech so the significance of deleting a server or two is not something they would realise.

I have found some backup from long ago but stopped copying recently. Blog post on Posterous. Can't get the embed code to work so the PDF is on Posterous as well. Maybe it works here



Chance of Adobe deleting content without notice, quite low you would think. but life is full of surprises.

English Sputnik Moment Continued

I wrote about "an English Sputnik moment" on a Posterous blog as will789gb. It may be that a sputnik moment story works because people want to know that a route has already worked out ok for someone else. The "first mover advantage" only works for some people, and there may not be many of them.

Peter Preston at the weekend was unhappy with the ABC numbers and other guides to when the web will work out for news finances.

Will newspapers ever make true financial sense of the web? Not until we know which figures matter, which convince advertisers – and which are mere febrile concerns.

But if the FT print audited circulation drops below 50,000 and yet it is still in operation, this could be a clue.

Then today he writes about libraries not being really needed so much today as if it was easy to work through the technology changes and realise that transition is obvious.

My best friend hasn't been near a library or bookshop for weeks: not since the whole of Trollope came downloaded free on a Christmas Kindle.........We can't embrace something fresh without leaving older ways behind.

If only he wrote so clearly about newspapers! I think it will be Printweek that offers a definitive take on the transition. see blog on IPEX for more.

There will never be the sort of financial information that shows for sure that a course of action is free of risk. But a few examples can help to build a case.

relimarual writes sense on Guardian books blog

Today the Guardian print literary review includes some extracts from the blog. Also there is a comment from the original writer responding to the other contributions. This is not always the case with Guardian blog extracts and is rare with Comment Is Free. Some of the columnists were not consulted about online versions of their print writing in the first place.

Original story by Laura Miller on how novels come to terms with the internet. Miller appears as relimarual on the blog and claims to have mentioned science fiction. I tried to add a comment pointing out what she originally said, that writers who specialise in character based fiction have "ceded the field to authors of speculative fiction, such as William Gibson and Cory Doctorow, whose hacker and brand-ninja characters exist primarily to explain or propound ideas about bleeding-edge technology." Well, I am not sure this is actually the whole picture for SF. DavidMW has a point in claiming that SF has been largely ignored.

Anyway, it turns out that my comment is no longer anywhere near the one from rellimarual. She has the last one as first displayed (and as in print) but loads more appear as a new one is added. Still much better than Comment Is Free where comments are closed quite rapidly.

So repeating this in my own blog helps me to keep track of things. For the same reason I still like Guardian Talk. The readers can start a topic. Much better than CiF from my point of view. I don't know why Guardian staff do not join in. I have contributed to media topics on PDF and citizen journalism. Not sure how much provocation to mix in, the Guardian voice will never appear. Over the years there is less going on with Guardian Talk I think. some people move to CiF but more to Facebook etc. I would guess.

I am trying to study the plot structure of Timequake as a way to edit blog bits together. There may have been another Timequake for ebooks in the first decade of this century. Many topics just seemed to repeat. Has it ended? 2010 seemed far off for Vonnegut. I may have written about this on another blog but it seems to fit in here.

I think Laura Miller may be the same Laura Miller that Google finds as working for Salon, based in the USA. Most of the references are to novels from the USA. The Guardian in print makes no mention of this. Has the copy appeared somewhere else? My guess is that London publishing scene is still some time behind in web awareness.

Preston suggests Google TV for UK local media

Over the weekend Peter Preston suggested Google TV as a way to resolve the issues around local TV in the UK.

In a sense, there's nothing totally revolutionary here. 71% of university students (on one recent YouGov sample) already watch two hours of TV online every day. 52% habitually watch television and mail or text their mates at the same time.

That is a YouGov poll for the UK. So as Google TV spreads in the USA the only gap will be to establish some UK local search tags.

There are dedicated TV sets with google TV software but the approach could start without them. Watching video online is possible with many devices. This can coexist with many forms of TV.

Preston welcomes print prospects for news

Peter Preston claims there is still a future for print.

The point to note isn't how vulnerable our printed newspapers are but how surprisingly resilient.

However I think he should visit print trade shows every so often. At IPEX there was no equipment on show from Man Roland. They may not expect to sell many new machines in the UK.

At Graph Expo in Chicago I notice there are no stands from Heidelberg or Komori. So litho may not be facing up to digital print this time around.

Digital is suited to short runs or relatively short runs. There could be more regianla variation in the Saturday Guide or other supplements. I think the Guardian should check out forms of print that benefit from web input.

What would Jeff Jarvis do?

The Guardian / Observer seems to be quite interested in the Times paywall. It is not that clear that they have a different policy.

Peter Preston seems to think that not only will people subscribe but then rethink their experience of the Web -

So, once I've stumped up cash for access, I don't necessarily look at paywalled paper newspaper sites in the same old digital way. I may read them as I would a print newspaper. I'm not clicking around, adding page view to page view, following a tale that interests me from site to site. Consistency counts. My habits have changed because I've paid good money. The stuff behind the wall looks like a newspaper and basically exists to be read as an electronic newspaper. There's a certain logic here.

Well, time will tell. It is not only Peter Preston but also Media Guardian on a Monday that is on the Murdoch case. Charles Arthur asks whether Facebook is a friend or foe? The assumption seems to be that the media pages are only read by people who work as journalists, probably in print, and that most print journalists see Murdoch as a champion of their views. The suggestion is that Facebook is a bigger threat to newspapers than Google so Murdoch should redirect his "ire". The evidence is muddled because there is a detail in the depths of the story. Google UK directs "21.9% of clicks to news and media sites, compared to 6.72% for Facebook." So the earlier remarks about Facebook compared to Google dotcom do not make a lot of sense except as a base for sweeping claims in the headline.

Anyway, my main point is that this directing of clicks through to news sites is seens as evidence of the terrible danger posed by social media, clearly a bad thing. Apparently Facebook is full of quotes lifted from newspapers. My own impression is that most of Facebook is based on personal experience. Twitter is followed by journalists looking for news.

If the Guardian is taking a different direction then acceptance of social media could be a consequence of an open site. The OhmyNews model welcomes contributions from readers and links to other sites. I realise this is repeating earlier posts but we seem to be going back in time.

I still think Jeff Jarvis is not getting the space in media Guardian that he did last year. I have tried to check this but got no reply. It was never definite but seemed to be every other week at one point. He turns up on the central pages but not as a regular towards where the ABC numbers on newspapers might be.

What would he do if on the Guardian staff with a regular spot? Is there a case for being more direct about the Times paywall? What sort of involvement from readers would be welcome?

James Murdoch recently suggested that the British Library should limit public access to newspaper archives so that there was more of a market for publishers. There is a lot to discuss.

Social Media

Still thinking about time and place. Settling back into Exeter so less likely to visit London again this week. I have started two new things at "Tales of Things" for Internet world, a stand for Brand Republic and the keynote theatre featuring Meg Pickard. This may be a way of asking a question. Or it may need to continue. What I wonder about is what these "Media Groups" actually think about print. Haymarket and the Guardian both seem to be moving online but still the print versions are a bit negative about digital. I did not find anything in the Guardian or Observer about the Digital Zone at the London Book Fair. Not long ago there was questioning piece about the "paperless office".

Blogger Jo Francis has reported on the digital aspect of the London Book Fair on her blog, but claims that the screen of the iPad is smudgy so not easy to read.

Top tip for putative iPad purchasers: you'll need to carry a microfibre cloth with you at all times, the screen's ability to pick up fingerprint marks is on a par with that of a black glass coffee table from Argos.

So at Internet World there will be Brand Republic with a stand and Guardian social media with a keynote. What to think?

Readers of Printweek could get involved in production of digital content. I asked at the Digital Zone if there would be a presence at IPEX and the view seemed to be that this was a different world. Last year there was an Espress book machine at the bookfair, later delivered to Blackwells on Charing Cross Road. Jo Francis has commented about the quality of the binding and also the problems with spare parts that closed it down for weeks at a time. However the idea of getting short run production closer to retail is worth investigating. Currently it seems that short runs are delivered into the existing national distribution. Generally I think there are ways for print companies to develop as part of communication, even though mostly digital.

Also, as Haymarket develops online what to make of the Printweek views?

Meanwhile Emily Bell has a few worries about Facebook and what established news organisations should be doing.
T

o completely spurn out of hand the incredible reach this platform could offer would simply be madness, at a time when finding a relevant audience for news and other content is the biggest challenge. But to hand over all of this activity wholesale to Facebook suggests that within five minutes there will be another head-scratching session as media executives hunt for the teaspoons from the family silver Google left behind.

I think it could have been sensible to make more of Guardian Talk, a board i have contributed to. The public can start a new topic as suits their interest. There has never been any promotion in the print Guardian. No Guardian staff have ever contributed anything as far as I know, except one prepress bit of news on PDF. The format for Comment Is Free assumes that the journalists set the topic. Comment is closed after quite a short time. The only coverage of OhmyNews that i know about has been on the Technology pages, now closed down. True, the not very funny series on a fictional citizen journalist has ended, but not much factual content has replaced it.

So will Facebook make more sense for most people? Probably. There is no print version with a dissonant view.

It will be interesting to see what turns up online from Earl's Court this week.

Rusbridger tests the iPad

The Observer had a long review of the iPad from Alan Rusbridger. There may be some clues for the future of the Guardian. He likes the options for video and rich content. He would prefer a keyboard but seems to think about it as a device for people to consume content. Maybe this is why it gets more space than other devices. He is a bit dismissive of the Kindle and Sony Reader. The issue is not covered that there could be damage to eyesight if staring at a backlit screen too long. I think there is still a demand for text and also through moving text about people can select and comment. The iPad is only one option.

#likeminds , citizen journalism

Found this Idio blog through Twitter and following @scottgould from #likeminds connections.

Citizen Journalism / Crowd-sourcing

With every major international event that occurs, it seems that citizen journalism takes another step into the mainstream. From Twitter reports emerging out of the streets of Iran, to videoblogs during the earthquakes in South America, the world is taking notice of personal voices, as tools such as Twitter and Youtube become a protocol for mass individual reporting. Many publishers have made great strides in this area, but still the vast majority of mainstream news is produced by paid journalists. There are certain areas which are very likely to move towards the crowd-sourcing model in the next years, including sports reports and hyperlocal news. And since a lot of reporting is already been done for free, why shouldn’t publishers take advantage?

This is about fourth in line as an idea to lower the cost of journalism. Thing is, citizen journalism also involves some editorial scope for the citizen. Not just video of the earthquake for the professionals to select. But at least citizen journalism is still on the agenda.

By the way, still no reply from the Guardian as such. Jeff Jarvis has commented on this blog, and returned to Guardian in print. But I would still like to know how to check a fact about the Guardian.

Jeff Jarvis leaves you wanting more as Victor Keegan relaunches on Twitter

There was Jeff Jarvis in the print Guardian yesterday but I still get the impression some coverage is reduced. He was on the main page for comment. Last year there was often more pages to come, including analysis on newspapers. I will look carefully for how this continues.

Meanwhile from Twitter I discover that Victor Keegan is leaving the Guardian. When is not stated. The Technology pages were really good to read. Blogs etc are ok but there is nothing wrong with considered print once a week.

Apparently there will soon be an app based on poetry in London. And Tweets will continue.

Guardian conversation continued

Jeff Jarvis has commented on the previous post and it turns out he will be in the print version of the Guardian tomorrow. So I look forward to this.

However I have not heard from the Guardian as such. I have an email for the Press Office from the switchboard and have left a couple of voice messages. My statement that there has been less Jeff Jarvis than I would expect is still reasonable. Why this could be is speculation, only encouraged by a lack of information.

Generally I think the Guardian could explain itself a lot more, especially to people who might be supportive. The Talk website is hardly ever mentioned in print, there is never any reply from Guardian staff to any contribution. My interest is in PDF and citizen journalism/OhmyNews .

Today Peter Preston states the losses for the Times and Independent. Why do executives leave the Guardian? Who knows? Some sort of citizen journalism model might be useful sometime soon. Requires engagement in conversation.

Any views on Jeff Jarvis in the Print Guardian ?

I am still trying to check out my guess that the print guardian has reduced the frequency for Jeff Jarvis on a Monday. Two voice messages now for the Press Office. I have been told an email address but no reply to that either.

This is only a blog but I do try to check some facts.

There are losses for the Guardian and I know there are job losses. But my general point is that readers who could also contribute would do more if there was more open information. So far this year there has been the closing of Technology in print and a "slimmed down" Observer. There was an announcement that Simon Caulkin was dropped. Jeff Jarvis just seems to have gone away.

There is still almost no detail on citizen journalism. Both reports i know of were in the Tech pages. OhmyNews has some problems and is changing the business model to seek subscription support. But I think the value of interactivity has to be a part of a new approach.

The print Guardian has done almost no explanation on the closure of local TV in Manchester.

So if anyone has any info on when or if Jeff Jarvis will appear in print, please add a comment.

I realise he contributes to a podcast but I am still concerned with the print product I subscribe to.

Meanwhile Buzzmachine continues. Spheres of discovery shows human links as part of the scene.

-----------------

And how is money made? We don’t know that yet, either, of course.

Finding Jeff Jarvis

More mystery on the Guardian Media page for Monday. No mention of the closing of Channel M in Manchester that I can find. The Guardian must know about this. Why not share with the people who buy the paper?

I think the future model must involve the public somehow.

Also is the BBC worth some consideration? roughly what the print journalists have done is to block the BBC, then sell off the print and back off the video. My guess is this will be the pattern for the UK. The established media have enough clout to block new models but not enough whatever to actually base anything much in the UK. there is local news on Facebook, hosted somewhere. Here in Exeter we are still officially in Plymouth.

Another thing I think Jeff Jarvis may have been discontinued or cut back a bit. Very unusual now to find him in the Media on a Monday. Buzzmachine continues. Recently some excellent thought about comments. I wonder if Peter Preston reads this sort of thing?

Augmented Observer

I cannot get used to where to find things in the Observor. The Media page is much reduced for anything positive about the Web. The Networker is now in the Review along with Discover Science though this turns out to be technology again on several occasions. Technology was closed down in the Guardian for a Thursday, maybe this is where to find it. But is has a fashion gossipy kind of gloss. The argument seems to be that barcodes can be used to add multimedia to print. This is amazing for advertising. Surely this could be on the Peter Preston page?

It was interesting for me that Exeter was mentioned. I live in Exeter but the #likeminds event feels like a disconnect with usual life. More on this another time.

Yet there are some who think that AR has already had its brief time in the sun. At the Like Minds conference in Exeter at the beginning of March, Joanne Jacobs, a social media consultant, described an AR application that demanded you buy a T-shirt and then go and sit in front of your webcam – so you could play Rock, Paper, Scissors. By yourself.

"It's hopeless," Jacobs said.

There could be more critique at a future event. the claims for social media, however augmented, are so extensive and so accepting of advertising in the mix that a thorough check would be in order.

Observer is ok

The revised Observer seems ok as a read. Peter Preston still has reservations about the BBC and bloggers but what to expect? This will just continue as the print version gets smaller.

I think this bit by Blake Morrison may be about bloggers as well as a review of Reality Hunger: A Manifesto by David Shields

Every artistic movement is a bid to get closer to reality, he argues, and it's in lyric essays, prose poems and collage novels (as well as performance art, stand-up comedy, documentary film, hip-hop, rap and graffiti) that such impetus is to be found today. Key components include randomness, spontaneity, emotional urgency, literalism, rawness and self-reflexivity. A loosely defined genre, then: in fact, a genre committed to genre-busting. But a genre opposed to current fiction.

I may well include some fiction as well as links etc. Stories for OhmyNews will continue to be based on fact.

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.