Comments on: The futures — plural — of journalism

By: vitsem

vitsem — Fri, 25 Dec 2009 09:27:37 +0000

I want to quote your post in my blog. It can?
And you et an account on Twitter?

By: Old Forest, New Trees » Blog Archive » Why this isn’t a media revolution

Thu, 26 Nov 2009 20:55:10 +0000

[...] few days later, I think the anger is fading and we’re ready to look forward again. Like Steve said, there’s more than one way to skin this cat. Like Carol said, it’ll require listening [...]

By: Making the most of making the media | Lascher at Large

Making the most of making the media | Lascher at Large — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 00:07:18 +0000

[...] too). For example, Steve Woodward describes a “cultural gulf” in his discussion of the “futures – plural – of journalism.” I agree with Michael Anderson, who responded in Woodward’s comments area, arguing that [...]

By: Delbert Schafer

Delbert Schafer — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 17:57:14 +0000

A great reporting job of the cognitive dissonance of a meeting planned with the best intentions.

By: Libby Tucker

Libby Tucker — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 23:55:10 +0000

Great summary Steve. Getting the idea out there is really just a first step toward accomplishing the group’s goal of creating a network for independent journalists. I’m excited about the conversation that’s now happening in our Google Group http://groups.google.com/group/wemakethemedia/topics. We’re starting to sketch out the next steps for the incubator with the idea that it could someday expand into a more formal venture!

Libby

By: Michael Andersen

Michael Andersen — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 19:36:10 +0000

I really like this, Steve.

One quick thought that I won’t have time to phrase more elegantly until at least Thursday: we should all be cautious of the stiffening narrative that the Young Twittering Turks have some monolithic point of view as a group.

If you read the stream closely (instead of recoiling from it in general, as several people seem to), you’ll see that even our super-smart, chatty naysayer Matt Davis was transcribing on his Twitter stream the ideas he liked and found interesting. But he also delighted in stirring up trouble by echoing other people’s frustrated outbursts. So people came away with the conclusion that the young folks were angrier and less solution-oriented than we (I’ll group myself with the young folks) actually were.

Personally, I found the whole concept of solving an entrepreneurial problem with a big-D-Democratic process infuriating. (Fascinating, but infuriating.) I think Buel and the other organizers should consider the fact that their method for building a durable institution — a great big meatspace meeting — is no longer the only way to get the job done.

In general: Young people should see more than gray hair on the old people. Old people should see more than laptops on the young people.

And I think we’re almost all trying.

By: Steve Woodward

Steve Woodward — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 00:18:27 +0000

T.A.: I agree that Ron, Joe and all the organizers deserve much credit for putting in a lot of selfless time and energy for an issue they consider vital to the public discourse. Believe me, I also hope they find some concrete solutions. After all, Nozzl Media’s whole reason for being is to build new revenue streams for newspapers.

Michelle: Thanks for the clarification about the incubator idea. I also love the small-group idea. I’ve been thinking in recent years about the possibility of a freelance copy-desk firm that contracts with newspapers. The idea could be expanded to other journalistic specialties and structured like a physician or law firm, which could contract with multiple publications that can’t afford full staffs. Sorry if I’m repeating stuff you’ve already talked about. I’ll read the #wmtmsmall tweets to see your group’s discussion.

By: My views on WeMakeTheMedia event – after the hangover | JOE WILSON

My views on WeMakeTheMedia event – after the hangover | JOE WILSON — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:47:57 +0000

[...] http://nozzlmedia.com/2009/11/the-futures-plural-of-journalism/ [...]

By: t.a. barnhart

t.a. barnhart — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:44:24 +0000

part of what Joe Smith & the rest were trying to do was come out of the day with tangible action items, not a list of good intentions. knowing Joe, he has no problem with the results going off in directions the planners did not foresee. he’s doing the best he can, as we all are. at least he, Ron Buel and the others made the effort to make this event happen. given who they are, they were able to bring together a unique collection of persons, and they did it in a way that allowed those of us who want to, to create our own set of plans, ideas, experiments moving forward.

btw, love the MST3K analogy. it was fun. but the event was not a bad movie anthology, just one of a particular perspective & scope. and it did initiate some good things.

By: Michelle Rafter

Michelle Rafter — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:05:31 +0000

Thoughtful analysis Steve. I’d agree that there will be no single right path in the future, just as vastly different models, of journalism and how it’s funded, have existed in the past.

I’d like to point out, however, that the idea of an incubator bubbled up during one of the breakout sessions (the one devoted to exploring how a bunch of solo journalists or other small groups could work separately but also together) and wasn’t really just Libby’s idea, though she definitely contributed to the concept and did a good job articulating what our group discussed.

Michelle Rafter