Dispatches from the living amongst journalism's walking dead

Month: August 2010

Copyright changes aren’t necessary to save media

Yet another “academic” call has been made to change U.S. copyright law to provide special protection for mainstream news sources – and again, these academics ignore the very basics of what it means to aggregate news online.

This time, the nonsense comes out of the Wharton School, who one would think knows a thing or two about business.

The entire essay is based on the assertion that newspapers and print media are in trouble because one can access the first paragraphs of those outlets’ stories on sites like Google News. For reasons that are not clearly explained, but rather assumed, the essayists insist:

This suggests tighter restrictions on the re-use of the intellectual property of others.  Fair use doctrine was never intended to protect nearly instantaneous re-posting or re-broadcast.

Aside: Since when is showing the first paragraph of a news story and providing a link to the original site re-posting or re-broadcasting?I get the impression the authors don’t distinguish between those who literally steal news stories in full and those who merely aggregate.

Their solution? Bar the aggregation of daily news stories for 24 hours after publication (in other words, after they’ve outlived their usefulness) and bar aggregation of weekly news for one week.

This alleged problem and proposed solution have numerous flaws.

1. If your first paragraph is all your story has to offer that’s worth reading, you have bigger problems than web traffic. Did everyone forget how writing works? If you write a good story with a solid lede, people will want to read more than is available on Google. It really is that simple. Better writing = more click-throughs.  More click-throughs = more online ad revenue.

2. And furthermore, most news sites actually write those summarizing ledes and super basic headlines because they actively are working to be listed high in web searches. Yes, they want Google to use their stories for reason #2. You can’t beg Google to take your content and then complain when they do.

3. Somehow the academics also seem to gloss over the fact that the Googles of the world are the #1 source of incoming traffic to news websites. They lament the declining online ad revenue, but fail to mention that what ad revenue news sites get is largely due to traffic from aggregators.

4. The essayists close with:

We believe that copyright law needs to be revised, and made both shorter and more draconian if journalism is to survive and (2) we believe that the hot news doctrine may offer some relief to traditional media, but not in its current, 90 year old form.

Why does traditional media require special protection or relief? The essay never addresses this. Some media outlets have developed new business models and techniques to adapt to the ever-changing web. Why should our laws be changed merely to protect those businesses that refused to do so? We in the media are quick to decry these kind of industry favors when they go to other industries – but we’re begging to get one for ourselves? That’s hypocritical, anti-capitalistic and frankly, kind of insulting to the readers we serve.
(OK, I’m done ranting. Back to your work day. )

TBD experiments in community engagement: Week 1

It’s the end of our first week on business at TBD and, admittedly, I’m completely exhausted. We all are.

It felt like a good first week for us – we got a lot of reviews, positive and negative, from other media sites and blogs. Despite the bugs and occasional complaints, we did have the opportunity to come out of the gates with a few engagement experiments you might find helpful at your own news orgs.

Open discussion on launch day

We had an open Cover it Live chat on the Community Blog from 9-4 on launch day. TBD Community hosts Lisa Rowan, Jeff Sonderman, Daniel Victor and Nathasha Lim took questions, complaints and bug reports from site visitors in an open and honest fashion. They didn’t just address the positive, they also did what they could to assuage the fears of those missing the former websites for WJLA and News Channel 8, now replaced by TBD.com.

Crowdsourcing for breaking news photos

On Thursday, the Washington, D.C. area woke up to severe thunderstorms, high winds, flooding streets – and a lot of damage. While our one full-time photographer was able to get a lot of art, we knew we couldn’t be everywhere. The call was sounded for photos on Twitter and on the site – and readers responded with submissions on-site and via Twitpic.

We ended up repeating this process later in the day with a reported electrical fire near the District’s business center. I first saw reports and Twitpics of the fire on a random Twitter search for “Fire near: Washington DC”. We quickly reached out on Twitter for permission to use the photos – and we were off to the races. It was great to get such good response out of the gate.

Working with bloggers on breaking news

Around 1:30 pm Tuesday, I looked over one of my series of Twitter searches and found a tweet reporting an alleged hit-and-run by a Metrobus in Arlington, Va. I contacted the guy, Matt, via reply and asked him if he’d talk to our Arlington reporter, Rebecca Cooper. He agreed.

At 2:12, network partner site Unsuck DC Metro, who the original tweet was directed toward, had a post up with the tip.

Another partner site, ARLNow, had a story with photos and quotes from the man involved in the accident at 3:07. TBD had a story with the tipster’s report and ARLNow’s report up before 4 p.m, approximately four hours before The Washington Post or WTOP (and a hat tip to the Post for promoting the great efforts of ARLNow).

Without the tip provided by Twitter and the hustle by the bloggers in our community network, there’s no way we could have had such a story so fast. Who says bloggers aren’t journalists? Not us.

Tapping into the crowd for political coverage

Questions submitted via Twitter hashtag

Questions submitted via Twitter hashtag

On Wednesday, TBD TV’s Newstalk program had the Democratic candidates for D.C. mayor on the program for a debate. In the hours before the 10 a.m. debate, we asked readers to submit their questions for the candidates via hashtag on Twitter. The response was more than we could fit on the program, which was great (see right).

When the debate went live on TV and online, fact-checking reporter Kevin Robillard had a live Cover it Live chat where readers could chime in with comments, ask questions and suggest facts to be checked as the candidates said them on the air.

The debate got a lot of traction on Twitter and on the chat. Kevin had some great material for The Facts Machine, which is a TBD blog dedicated to backing up or refuting questionable facts.

We hope to do a lot more projects like this in the future. Not bad for the third day out.

TBD 1.0 launches, now let the real fun begin

If you’ve been reading here – or really on most any journalism blog of late – you know I’ve been part of a team of excellent journalists who’ve been toiling away the past few months to get TBD off the ground.

TBD Home Page circa 4 am, Launch Day

TBD Home Page circa 4 am, Launch Day

Today is finally the day. Today, TBD.com has launched and all of us who joined this venture with high hopes of shaking up the news business get our chance to sink or swim.

I hope you’ll take a few minutes and take a look at the site. Let me know what you think, either here in the comments, in our live chat today or wherever you tend to post your rants. If you see technical issues, please do us a favor and report them here.

What we put out there today is nowhere near a “finished” product. We’ve said from the beginning that TBD will always be developing and changing as we get new ideas and more information – so consider this TBD 1.0.

I really want to take this opportunity to say I’ve been so lucky as a journalist and as a person to have been able to build this site with these amazing people. I’ve never been so challenged, felt so excited or learned so much in such a short time as I have here. I have had the time of my life putting together this big crazy idea – and I expect it to only get better as we actually get down to the business we all came here to do.

We’ve been getting a lot of press in the lead-up to launch and I expect to see more reviews in the coming days. I’m collecting them here. Let me know if I’ve missed any links.

Wave’s down, but Google certainly isn’t out

Once upon a time, Google Wave was the next big thing. I had high hopes for it’s use in news – but it was not to be.

Google announced Wednesday that it will stop development on the Wave project, citing a lack of user adoption. They will leave the site up through the end of the year, but probably not long after.

What went wrong? Simple: Wave started out buggy, slow and difficult to understandand it never got better. It also never really seemed to find it’s place in the daily rituals of regular people – which was a critical problem.

Lance Ulanoff at PC Magazine has a great piece about what went wrong with Wave. In short: It’s one thing for developers to love and use this product – for it to really succeed, it had to be adopted by some regular people.

On a personal level, I used Wave for a couple of months – but I always had to think, “Oh, I think I’ll go check Wave.” It didn’t make it’s way into my routines, it didn’t show up in my Gmail and it didn’t become part of my life. We forgot one another. I imagine this was the case for many people.

Even with Wave’s demise, Google certainly isn’t down or out in the world of social networking – nor should they be. Several tech watchers noted Google’s allusions to Wave-like features showing up in future projects – possibly indicating the development of Google’s rumored social networking site Google Me, which would take on Facebook head-on.

Mashable‘s Pete Cashmore is dubious about Google’s future in the social arena. He notes:

As Facebook builds a user base of more than 500 million people, it also stockpiles the personal information required to provide more comprehensive ad targeting — and a more personalized search engine — than Google could ever hope to engineer through algorithms alone.

Google Me seems to be growing past mere rumor and speculation at this point with the mercy-killing of Wave and several key acquisitions. Social media fans and developers are keeping a close eye on this project – and wondering if this time Google will have the right recipe to take their piece of the social media pie.

How we did it: Securing an occupied Twitter handle

It can be tough to be a new brand these days. Locking down namespace online is a huge part of a brand build – but much like potential mates, all the good ones seem to be taken.

We ran into that when we started building the brand for the soon-to-launch TBD. It’s a popular acronym, as everyone knows, so securing that namespace in social media was quite challenging. Though we’ve been tweeting for nearly two months as @TBDDC, this week we finally acquired @TBD. This is how it went down.

We wanted @TBD from the start, but it was occupied by a private, dormant account with zeroes across the board – no followers, no follows and no tweets.

Obviously, the first step in this scenario is to try to contact the handle owner. From my own account, I requested to follow this user to see if they were checking their notifications. Either they weren’t checking or I was rejected, because I never heard back.

I also sent the user a couple of @ replies to see if they were even checking those. No response.

It was time to turn to Twitter.

When you want to take this next step, it’s important to note Twitter’s policies in relation to your situation.

The policies are different depending on whether or not the account is active, whether the user is actively impersonating your brand and whether or not you have a registered trademark on your name.

If someone is actively using the handle you want in accordance with the rules, there’s little Twitter can do, even if you have a trademark on the name.

From Twitter:

Where there is a clear intent to mislead others through the unauthorized use of a trademark, Twitter will suspend the account and notify the account holder.

When an account appears to be confusing users, but is not purposefully passing itself off as the brand/company/product, the account holder will be notified and given an opportunity to clear up any potential confusion, per the guidelines listed below.

Contacting the user directly is really your only hope to getting the name in this instance.

If you want to acquire the handle of an inactive account, as we did, it really helps to have a registered trademark on the name. We did not have our trademark registration info right away, but I still submitted  a ticket request to have the name released.

Once we got our trademark registration information, I filed another ticket, this time under the trademark policy. This time I filled out the required trademark info. To do this, our Twitter account had to be linked to an email address from our domain (an important thing to note if you have a business or blog without a URL yet). This was the final thing that pushed it over the top and got us @TBD.

If you don’t have a trademark registration, you may still have a chance, though note this important point in Twitter’s inactive username policy:

We are currently working to release all inactive usernames in bulk, but we do not have a set time frame for when this will take place. If a username you would like has been claimed by an account that seems inactive, you should consider selecting an available variation for your use on Twitter.

Even so, it wouldn’t hurt to submit a ticket request from your account to report the inactive name.

When and if you get a username opened up, you can easily change your Twitter handle to the new one without affecting your followers, lists or settings. You can do this from the Account tab of your account Settings.  In our case, Twitter rolled @TBDDC over to @TBD for us.

When you change your Twitter handle, you have to be vocal about the change. If you can do it before the changeover, tell your followers what’s coming. After the change, they’ll receive your tweets at the new handle, but they may not realize the difference and may send replies and DMs to your old handle. Tweet about the change and encourage retweets. It might not hurt to briefly re-secure your old handle and put up a message there about the new account.

Note: If you get a second handle for this purpose, be  good citizen and don’t name-squat. After a couple of weeks or so, if you aren’t going to use this account for something else, delete it and re-open the name.

But even if you don’t get the handle you want, you shouldn’t let it stop you from jumping into social media.   It wasn’t a deterrent for TBD – we were able to build a lot of buzz on @TBDDC before we got the new name (and we were prepared to have that name be permanent).

If you can’t get the username of your brand, think of a way to make your own version. Shorten it, add an adjective or adverb, tack on a location or do something entirely out-of-the-box. It really isn’t all in a name. It all depends on how you use the medium and how well you can promote it elsewhere.

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén & Hosted by Pressable