Not another football sex scandal - surely the public have had enough? | Media. What's the point of the tabloid obsession with footballers' private lives? Does anyone care? Is anyone surprised? This is The Sun's front page on Saturday. It claims that Arsenal's manager, Arsene Wenger, had had an affair with a French singer [Not on the paper's website]. The following day, the News of the World alleged that two Newcastle United players had been partying with women while celebrating a victory. The headline, Toon stars' cocaine and sex orgy [behind paywall], was somewhat misleading because the article specifically states that the players did not touch the drug. To quote from the article: "Neither player is believed to have snorted the drug - but our revelations today take football to new depths of shame. " New depths of shame? Anyway, back to the exposures. Both the Wenger and Newcastle allegations appeared elsewhere.
But what is the point? As I never tire of saying, the moment papers expose "role models" as fallible they achieve the exact opposite of what they claim. Vatican announces zero-tolerance approach to paedophilia publicity. The Vatican today committed to tackle once and for all what it called the ‘unnatural and unforgivable practice’ of the sexual abuse of children by Catholic priests receiving widespread media coverage. ‘As a religious leader, I believe I have a moral obligation not to stand by and allow those in a position of influence and responsibility to take advantage of their role and publish such shameful and damaging stories,’ said the pope today. ‘If there’s one thing vulnerable, sexually-abused children don’t need, it’s being exploited by shameless journalists looking to make a quick buck by pedalling verifiable truths from credible sources.
The whole thing makes me sick.’ The Vatican’s crackdown will see the introduction of a harsh three-strikes-and-you’re-out policy for all media outlets caught reporting the abuse of children by Catholic priests. Click to send this story to a friend Posted: Sep 12th, 2010 by Genghis Cohen Click for more stories about: World News. The Journalists Formerly Known as the Media: My Advice to the Next Generation - Jay Rosen: Public Notebook. Jason Calacanis: Revenge is a new editorial project to rival TechCrunch | Media. Jason Calacanis is angry. You can tell he's angry partly because he talks even faster than normal, but also because he's (still) spitting feathers about TechCrunch founder (and now AOL, employee) Mike Arrington.
Calacanis claims Arrington froze him out of his chunk of the TechCrunch 50 event, but rather than wage full-on warfare, Calacanis is retaliating by aiming to beat TechCrunch at its own game. Calacanis is launching his own startup editorial project - called Launch - and event as a direct challenge to TechCrunch, he told the Guardian. Quite how much damage that will do to Arrington - who has now made his big money in the deal and is likely to be out within six months, if you ask Calacanis - remains to be seen. Photo by Joi on Flickr. Some rights reserved Beyond the revenge, Launch is interesting. Depth is the new black Calacanis says the thing he enjoys the most is writing, and that's where he's putting that angry energy. ABC The Drum - Quality journalism and a 21st century ABC. Updated Fri 3 Sep 2010, 7:35am AEST The 2010 election campaign was the journalistic gift that just keeps on giving. I had intended to draft these remarks once the result was known.
But remembering that I was speaking at the Melbourne Writers' Festival rather than Improv Night at the Comedy Festival, I couldn't wait for the white smoke. This election has changed how we think of 'politics as usual' in this country. It has also triggered significant debate about the practice of political reporting. And I can't let the opportunity of this speech go by without wading into these murky waters. So let me make some muddied observations about the campaign and how it was handled by the fourth estate and then make some tentative suggestions about implications for the media and the nature of news coverage. Then - following the proud traditions of these events - it will be time for questions, where you can tear into me. And important matters in play: the economy, the environment, national infrastructure. Write for Oprah? Wrong for Me.
From January through June of 2010 I wrote a column entitled “The Health Inspector” in O, The Oprah Magazine. Now, apparently, I have been fired; although they have not had the common courtesy to tell me so. The whole thing has been a bizarre, frustrating experience. It started last fall, when I got an e-mail from Tyler Graham. He introduced himself as the new health editor for O, The Oprah Magazine, saying he had only been on the job for 2 weeks. He had read my work in Skeptic magazine and wanted me to write a column for O. It was a chance to get my name and a mention of the Science-Based Medicine blog before a large readership (O’s circulation is nearly 3 million).I could make sure that at least my one little corner of the magazine was scientifically rigorous.They were going to pay me.
The skeptical community was delighted to learn that the SkepDoc had infiltrated Oprahdom. It soon became obvious that I would be working under strict limitations and tight editorial control. 5 things journalists should learn from bloggers. In digital storytelling many professional journalists would be wise to study and learn from the best bloggers. Here are some tips. It has struck me numerous times during the last couple of years: Many bloggers are far ahead of most professional journalists in writing well for the web. Here are five areas where I think many journalists could learn from the practice of good bloggers. And yes, I know I do a lot of generalizing here Many journalists are very good at this stuff – and there are some crappy bloggers out there as well. But still I think these are some valid points if you compare the typical news journalist with the better expert bloggers. 1.
It is a shame, really! For an example of this sloppy attitude among many journalists you may check this story from CNN about the Chinese blogger Han Han. The attitude is quite different among many good bloggers out there. 2. Stories change. I think many media organizations could do much better in this regard. 3. 4. 5. These are my thoughts. Letters to the editor. Rapid News Awards: An Explanatory Series. Professions and their Journalistic Values. Journalism professions have always had to maintain their own values. In the face of daunting political and commercial pressures, the work most esteemed by journalists must find its own place as best it can, because partisans and marketers will not find it for them. The rise of the internet has brought a new array of non-journalistic pressures. New technologies have brought more precise ways of finding out "what the audience wants," and the audience portrayed by these data have concerns of their own (pdf).
The same technologies have given non-profits, NGO's and advocacy groups a more direct line to the public, and their messages alternately bolster and obscure those of professional journalism. Some news organizations are tempted by the sirens' call of search demand, in which algorithms align audience interest with productive capacity; although these algorithms may not be evil, they are surely labelled "handle with care. " Like most aggregators, RNA directs attention to stories. The Continuum of Membership, or Professional Belonging. The American journalism profession is under considerable stress. It is threatened by the ongoing disengagement of its audiences. Its heretofore formidable sway over news gathering and distribution is being recast under new, and technologically revolutionary conditions.
Industries are shifting beneath its feet; its reporting supply is decreasing; and it suffers from public mistrust. Vigorous, and perhaps less professional competitors, jostle it from all sides. In the last article I brought up the possibility that two editors might disagree about the news judgment of a member, with one editor favoring the member's judgment and the other editor not.
Consider an even clearer example: suppose not two, but ten editors. When an editor vouches for a member this is called "following" the member (likewise, the act of repudiation is called "unfollowing"). Jay Rosen has asked whether the idea of "levels" might be useful in the news system, and RNA suggests that they are.
In or Out? Membership and Standards. By Lyn Headley August 17, 2010 In my last article I introduced the topic of the Rapid News Awards project: the tension between widespread participation and expert judgment. In most aggregators this tension is evident in the way new members are introduced into the newsgathering system and awarded the power to decide the news. I have already mentioned Digg and Google News, but the techmeme family of aggregators is another good example, including the recently released mediagazer. Like these systems, RNA's membership policy reflects a tension -- and strives to effect a balance -- between the centralization inherent in expertise and the diversity fostered by widespread participation.
But first, a piece of terminology. Earlier I called RNA an aggregator, but this was loose talk. Now every aggregator requires members. Digg solves the problem by letting anybody with an email address join the site, and using secret methods to weed out or weaken the bad members (as does its cousin reddit). A Conversation about Aggregators and Professionalism.
With the rise of the internet, much discussion has taken place concerning the division of labor between professional journalists and the audiences they serve. The increasing availability of new communication technologies has been accompanied by critiques of existing forms of authority and professional expertise in many fields, including journalism. For some, this has raised the specter of a decline of journalistic standards. For others, it portends a more vibrant democracy. The Rapid News Awards project, part of my doctoral research at UC San Diego, is an open source web software system that aims to advance the conversation about this dynamic. Rapid News Awards, or RNA for short, is an aggregator. By aggregator I mean a process that arranges and summarizes a record of social interactions. Different aggregators embody different approaches to the problem of authority and expertise, and RNA is no exception to this general rule.
Take (a simplified version of) Digg, a prominent aggregator. Editorials: To sign or not? Only a few major journals continue to print anonymous editorials representing a publication's point of view. Most opt instead to run articles signed by staff or outside experts -- and many in the scientific, medical and publishing communities say that's a good thing. Image: Guillaume Carels via Wikimedia CommonsNewspapers across the globe are known for taking political stances, with anonymously authored pieces spreading a publication's point of view across its editorial pages.
Major scientific Only a few major journals continue to print anonymous editorials representing a publication's point of view. Coping with a Hyperstory: Lessons from a Biologist’s Ordeal « Research Explainer. Being inundated by a “hyperstory” that attracts white-hot media attention can be disconcerting and even traumatizing for researchers used to the Samantha Joye coped with a tidal wave of media relative anonymity of the laboratory and the seminar room.
The best recent example is that of University of Georgia biologist Samantha Joye’s experience when her research revealed the presence of underwater oil plumes in the Gulf of Mexico during the BP oil spill. Her communication response, and that of the university’s news service, offers lessons in how scientists and their institutions should—and should not—handle a hyperstory. Joye’s research and experience with the media were covered in a July 2, 2010, Science Magazine article by Erik Stokstad. I should emphasize that my critique of this case is in no way meant as a criticism of the competence or professionalism of Joye or the university’s news service. With those caveats in mind, first the apparent missteps: Like this: Like Loading... Some excellent questions for medical reporters : Respectful Insolence. Having taken note of my little missive yesterday about New York Times health reporter Tara Parker-Pope and her utter credulity towards the woo that is acupuncture, Dr.
R. W. makes an observation: A number of years ago I ran across Science Education in Preparation for the Ministry. The premise of the document, written by pathologist and teacher Ed Friedlander, MD, was that because members of the clergy are often called on to speak in areas where morality and ethics interface with science, they should have some prerequisite knowledge. An excellent idea, and Dr. Outline the scientific method. Overall, it’s a good list, although the questions about Medicare’s prospective payment system belongs in the realm of the political and business, not in the realm of medicine. I humbly suggest that Dr. Explain what placebo effects are and why placebo controls are so important, particularly for health outcomes with a large subjective component, like pain or anxiety. Medical reporting in the lay press does the public a disservice.
---because it distorts more than it informs. Regular readers of this blog know that I've been critical of the popular media for a long time. My favorite media outlet to pick on is the New York Times because it is purported to be the most reliable source for medical news. When they blow it, and they usually do, we really need to be concerned about the rest of the popular media. A number of years ago I ran across Science Education in Preparation for the Ministry. The premise of the document, written by pathologist and teacher Ed Friedlander, MD, was that because members of the clergy are often called on to speak in areas where morality and ethics interface with science, they should have some prerequisite knowledge.
Outline the scientific method. Explain the hazards of examining scientific questions in the arena of public debate. Explain how the 1918 influenza pandemic was fundamentally different from the 1957, 1968 and 2009 pandemics. Define and distinguish: epidemic, pandemic, endemic. Should science journalists take sides? | Not Exactly Rocket Science. Tonight I took part in a debate at the Royal Institution of Great Britain entitled “Should science journalists takes sides?” The event was chaired by Fiona Fox of the Science Media Centre and panellists included myself, Mark Henderson from the Times, Ceri Thomas from BBC’s Today programme and Steve Rayner, the Director of the Institute for Science, Innovation and Society. This is a slightly extended version of what I said during my five minutes of the debate. The title of this debate opens itself up to multiple interpretations: whose ‘side’ are we talking about? It is clear to me that science journalists should not take the side of any particular scientist, of a specific idea, or even of science itself.
The problem comes from a desire to be objective or neutral. Problem One: a disservice to journalism. Here’s a case study. People might have got away with this a decade ago, but not now. Problem Two: laziness. How many times have I read that phrase, or a variant like it? Media/Political Bias.
Journalism without integrity. Bagehot: Tabloid rule. The Curious Wavefunction. What next for Metgate? Games with Words: Science, Grime and Republicans.