Dispatches from the living amongst journalism's walking dead

Category: New Technology

Google Glass: The Next Greatest Thing Ever for Journalism?

When Google announced the arrival of its earliest model of Glass – the wearable computer that looks like a suspended monocle – my newsroom at Digital First Media’s Thunderdome wanted to be among the first to experiment with this new tool that could potentially have huge implications for journalism.

In Google’s Glass Explorer program, interested participants tweeted and G+’ed to Google what they would do if they had a Glass (#ifIhadglass) and Google chose the first testers of the new device from this eager pool. My boss, Robyn Tomlin, was one such winner.

In the time since we got our newsroom Glass, it’s been passed around, tried out and experimented upon by a number of staffers. A few of my much-smarter co-workers are working on apps for the new toy. It is expected to be in wider release next year.

Training: Intro to mobile journalism tools

Last week, I taught a mobile journalism workshop as part of APME’s Newstrain seminar at the Newseum here in Washington, D.C. While I’m not a mobile journalist per se, I am a journalist that loves my smartphone. The class was aimed at those who are new to most mobile news gathering, reporting and publishing apps and practices – with and without smartphones.

We got into:

As part of the training, I gave out a handout of entry-level mobile tools for gathering media, reporting news, publishing and being productive on the go. I gathered these from my own experiences and those of other online savvy journos I know. Check it out (also after the jump) – and tell me what, if anything, you’d add. 

Link roundup: Demographics, Quora, Instagram and news from old media

File under “Good to Know”

  • In not-at-all-shocking news, a Pew study shows the Internet Gains on Television as Public’s Main News Source . Since 2007, the number of 18 to 29 year olds citing the internet as their main source has nearly doubled, from 34% to 65%. Not surprising numbers, but notable nonetheless. This should have TV stations that rely on their newscasts as the sole breaking news source shaking in their boots.
  • Twitter Media gets into what makes good hashtags work. As someone who frequently struggles with the issue of deciding when and how to use hashtags, this post on the well-known hashtag work of 106 & Park really underscores why theirs work so well. For one, they aren’t forced news tags.

New-ish Tools for News

  • Last week, online media watchers wet their collective pants over Instagram, an iPhone photo-sharing application with a built-in social network, when Mashable highlighted how NPR is using it to connect with its audience. NPR, as usual, is out connecting on another app before everyone else – but whether this experiment will pay off is another story. As of right now, the app is only on iPhone, but it’s user base is growing by leaps and bounds. Judging from the comments on the Mashable post, those using it aren’t pleased at the prospect of influx of media.
  • On a related note, The Atlantic’s Alexis Madrigal gives a good and personal explanation of Instagram’s appeal.
  • I didn’t wet my pants, but I fell in love with Instagram too. I’ve started using its nice filters on my personal Tumblr project, 365 Snapshots.
  • I’m not sure where it started, but there was also a new media gold rush last week to Quora, an online question-and-answer oriented discussion site. Everyone wants to know how it could be used for journalism, especially since it is such a tame, smart (on the surface at least) community that is curating information. My colleague Daniel Victor blogged about some potential uses and started a topic on Quora looking for ideas (very meta) and. We’ll see where it goes. I know my coworkers at TBD are hard at work on this one.

Paywalls, paywalls!

  • The Dallas Morning News is taking a lot of content behind a paywall, with the old argument “because we have to” and “other newspapers do it”. The comments do not belie a supportive readership. The monthly digital-only price seems quite high to me.
  • The Daily O’Collegian, the campus newspaper for Oklahoma State, is also going behind a paywall for non-local readers. This may be the one instance in which I think a paywall makes perfect sense for a newspaper. It does make me feel for the student journalists who will try to use their links there for clips, however. Maybe they can give out a special coded version or something?

Real names are the answer – again

Fun Project

  • NY Times project Mapping America: Every City, Every Block allows users to browse local data from the Census, based on samples from 2005 to 2009 on an easily understood map. I’m in love with it and wish TBD had the budget to build something similar.

10 ways journalists can use Storify

When Storify appeared on the collective journalism screen a few weeks back at TechCrunch Disrupt, it inspired a lot of oohs, ahhs and speculation as to how it would work for journalists.

There are similar curation tools out there, like KeepStream and Curated.by, though they focus primarily on collecting tweets (Correction: KeepStream also allows for Facebook integration). Storify, on the other hand, allows a user to organize various media (text, documents, video, images) and social media (Twitter, Facebook, etc.) into an orderly, linear presentation. The story pieces retain all of their original links and functionality – and the full presentations are embeddable on any site.  It has a very easy-to-use search for social media keywords and works using a drag-and-drop functionality. In other words – it’s easy multimedia for even the most technologically challenged journalist.

It has a couple of downfalls, the biggest of which, to me, is the lack of hard timestamps on content from Twitter (though that’s largely Twitter’s fault).

In the weeks since the Nieman Lab actually used Storify to explain Storify, many journalists and bloggers have taken the opportunity to experiment with the tool – with incredibly varied results. Here’s a few interpretations of just how Storify has been and can be used in journalism.

1. Organizing reaction in social media. The Washington Post gathered reaction from Twitter and Facebook to the resignation of Washington D.C. Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee last week. While there are a lot of tools once could use to do this (Quote URL, Twitter search, Cover it Live), the Storify approach looks very clean and was likely very fast to put together. It’s a great tool for on-the-fly curation from various social media sources.

2. Giving back-story using past content. PBS NewsHour had a different take on Rhee’s resignation. Going beyond the basic topic archive page, their piece created a summary of Rhee’s past challenges with DCPS, weaving in stories, videos and scripts from their archives with some curated social media reactions. It is similar to a traditional story in its scope, giving the full background on Rhee’s tenure with reaction quotes via social media.

3. Curating topical content. NYU Studio 20’s East Village used Storify and a very sharp web presentation to create SocialDiningNYC, a site that has collect and curated information on NYC restaurants. Each venue has it’s own Storify line collecting reviews, reactions, media and info – and each file is linked from a primary hub site. The key to making this look nice was the consistency with which each Storify file was built and worded.

4. Displaying a non-linear social media discussion or chat. Penn Professor and Wired blogger Tim Carmody used Storify to illustrate an amusing Twitter quest he took on to get a few key social media contacts to follow him. He pulled together the entire back-and-forth between him, the people he was trying to engage and his current followers. It looks a lot better than TweetSpat (and involves more characters) and it makes the conversation seem more linear than it likely did in real time. This is a fun idea – and it could be great for archiving Twitter chats into some modicum of sense.

5. Creating a multimedia/social media narrative. Last Friday, I used Storify at TBD to make sense of an ever-changing series of events involving a death outside popular Washington D.C. nightclub DC9. In the course of one day, the story took a lot of twists and turns, illustrated in the narrative by tweets (from both news orgs and those reacting), photos, video and documents. Reading down the story, you can get a feel for how the events developed and evolved in a way that’s not entirely dissimilar to more traditional narrative stories. I talked a little bit more about the story behind this piece to the Nieman Storyboard, if you want to know more.

6. Organize your live tweets into a story: Michael Margolis of GetStoried used Storify to tell the story of his time spent at the National Storytelling Festival. He weaves in quotes and experiences from the scene as tweets from throughout the day. I could see this as being very useful for reporters who live tweet press conferences, government meetings and events. Using this method, those reporters could focus on Twitter in real-time, then build a story from those tweets (and others’) when the event is over.

7. Collaborate on a topic with readers. Seamus Condron of ReadWriteWeb tested out Storify with RWW’s Twitter followers. He posed the question “My day would be a lot easier if Twitter…”. The story builds out from there with responses to the prompt from followers, @RWW replies and contextual info from other media in response to reader contributions.

These are likely just the beginning of what’s been done or could be done using Storify. I have dreamed up a few more ideas if you’d like to think about using this tool on your site.

8. Create a timeline of events. I know from experience that it can be a big pain to build an attractive online timeline without the aid of a designer. I think Storify’s interface would be a quick way to pull in text and other content into a timeline format that could look nice without any fancy HTML.

9. Display audience content from across platforms. Say you’re asking your readers to give you photos, videos and reactions based around an event or topic. You put out this call on Twitter, YouTube, Facebook and on your site. Instead of gathering all of this content and re-publishing it on-site, you can organize all of those updates, comments, Flickr photos, YouTube videos, Twitpics and emailed-in multimedia into one Storify file without any CMS nonsense.

10. Live curate live tweets from the stream. If you have multiple reporters or sources live-tweeting a news event, pull them together quickly and in an order that makes sense in Storify. Sure, you could pull all of their tweets or use a hashtag using other means, but this way you could choose to select only some tweets – and it wouldn’t matter who used a hashtag or not, as you can search for tweets via keyword.

How to build, manage and customize a Crowdmap

So you’ve got a great idea for a user-contributed map you need to launch RIGHT NOW. Ushahidi’s Crowdmap makes it pretty easy, and hopefully this post makes it even easier. All examples shown are from TBD’s Crowdmap for D.C.’s election.

First of all, if you’re mapping a crisis, Crowdmap recommends checking our their Emergency Response Strategy first (pdf).

Also, check and see if anyone else has done your map idea with a Google Search. If someone else has already built a map of what you want to do in the same area, maybe you should just help them out instead of replicating the work.

The Quick Build

Sign up for a Crowdmap account at www.crowdmap.com and log in.

1. Click on Create New Deployment

2. On the deployment setup page, pick a url, name and tagline for your map. Keep SEO in mind here to make it easier to find. (You can edit this later, so don’t sweat it too much). Click Finish.

3. Click on admin dashboard for your map or go to http://yourmapname.crowdmap.com/admin

This is your map’s Dashboard. Bookmark it. Your map is now live and activated. If you need to launch it right now, you can – though there’s further additions and customizations you can do. Note: With the default settings, people will only be able to submit reports on the site.

More after the jump (had to do it for images…)

Quickly create a collaborative map with Crowdmap

Every election since I started my professional career has led the news organization I was working for at the time to say, “We really should have a map of election problems.” Then we’d build some UGC map held together by virtual duct tape. Sound familiar?

User-populated maps have come a long way in the past few years thanks to lots of free technology available on the web. Google Maps, for instance, was a early precursor that still has a lot of utility today. See my [very impressive] map for free donuts as a good (and yes, silly) example of a quick Google collaborative map.

In 2008, Ushahidi (which is Swahili for “testimony” – the more you know) made its debut in mapping post-eletion violence in Kenya . The mapping tool allowed for user to add reports to the map using SMS, email and on-site forms. They’ve since added support for reports via Twitter hashtag.

While they’ve had great success in mapping international crises (like the Haiti Rescue Efforts) and domestic trends (like the Atlanta Crime Map), the main problem with Ushahidi is that it isn’t altogether quick or easy to get a map set up. The software is free and open source, but you need to have a server and programming know-how to get it going.

Thankfully, Ushahidi recently launched a stripped-down, hosted version of it’s mapping tool called Crowdmap. In about 10 minutes, you can have a user-contributed map up and running with no programming know-how and no server.

WMATA Problem Map

WMATA Problem Map

Reports submitted on-site flow in to a back-end queue that’s easy to publish as verified or unverified reports. Messages sent via email or Twitter can be converted to full map reports by an admin in a matter of a couple of minutes. All reports have an option to add photos, videos or news links to more info. You can schedule reports to publish and certain times, plus designate specific submitters (like your staff) to have their reports be auto-approved.

Crowdmap does have a couple of downsides. For one, it isn’t embeddable on your site. It has to be used on Crowdmap, though you can use a Google analytics tracking code to track traffic. It also isn’t particularly customizable, so you can’t brand it or add significant new features as you can with Ushahidi. Still, though, it’s a heckuva lot better than some of the cobbled-together maps I’ve had to put together before.

I recently built a couple of these maps for TBD.com, one for mapping Washington-area transit issues and another for monitoring polling problems on the day of D.C.’s primary elections. Neither took much time to set up and both had/have decent participation, given that we promote it on our site. We got far more Twitter reports than anything else, which is likely because we put the most effort into promoting it there. At some point, I’d like to expand our reports to include SMS contributions.

I’ll have a post soon that will walk though setting up a Crowdmap, but for now, check out the site and tinker around. It’s super easy.

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.

4 potential uses for Google Wave in news

Lots of journalism’s resident tech geeks and big thinkers have been talking up the potential of Google Wave to “transform journalism”. I’m not going to go so far as to say that, but it does have a lot of features that make it an ideal candidate for fixing problems a lot of newsrooms face thanks to limitations in current technology.

Here are four general ways newsrooms may chose to implement Google Wave. Assuredly, they have countless wavelets.

1. It’s a newsroom budgeting solution

The problem: Anyone who’s had to share a newsroom budget in Word/Google Docs/Excel/etc. knows the struggle of shared document updating and access. Wave takes Google Docs to the next level – and makes it a lot easier for several parties to edit the same document in real time. No more “This document is currently in use, you will enter read-only mode”.

In Google Wave, you can edit the type submitted by anyone else. You can add comments to any part of the type and spin off conversations/collaborations from the budget to, say, talk about a specific long-term project. You can copy and past whole sections of a wave (the entire “document”) or a wavelet (a spun-off conversation within the document) to new waves, making it easier to carry a daily budget to the next day.

If a newsroom had daily, weekly, monthly and longer term budgets in Google Wave, we might not even need to have several meetings a day just so know where we are on today’s budget.

Here’s a potential walk-through:

Editors all add their reporters’ budget lines into a semi-private daily budget wave. The Managing Editor has questions about a particular budget line that she adds as a wavelet to that potion of the text. A back-and-forth with the reporter and their editor ensues there.

Photo Editor goes though the daily budget and adds notation as to which stories have art by creating news blips (individual comments) or starting new wavelets (conversations) within the daily budget as to why certain assignments weren’t shot, when art should get in, etc. She can also add the actual photos or videos into the budget for a page designer/web producer to grab later.

In other words, it’s your daily budget meetings, digitized. What a time saver!

2. It’s a reporting collaboration tool

The problem: Working on a project with another reporter or editor is never ideal. There’s always a mess of emails, attached Word files for notes and meetings, meetings, meetings. In the end, it’s difficult for the research and writing of two reporters to fully integrate  in a way that doesn’t look like two people were thrown together on a story.

Because of it’s real-time nature and media sharing capabilities, Wave is an ideal place for a newsroom project team to work. The reporters could not only share all of their notes, recorded conversations and research in this shared space, they could also co-write the story (or sections of the story) in a Wiki-ized wave.

The reporters can offer one another notes on each and every section of the article as they piece it together, rewrite or edit sections according to new info and insert new pieces in the middle of the old ones to help the story take shape. As one gets a quote that would fit well int the story, they can insert it as a wavelet, with the audio of the interview included if they’d want.

Reporters could, like this enterprising chap, conduct interviews with sources via Wave, either as a chat or video conference. that way, they could each ask questions (even if they aren’t in the same place) and involve many sources in the same conversation if needed.

All the while, an editor can see the progress every step of the way and make comments and edits on every portion of the story, even if a reporter is currently editing. Collaborators from video, graphics and photo can also chime in at various points, showing the latest photo of the source quoted (for instance) or asking questions relating to their part of the project.

And all along the way, the staff may chose to open up the research or even the article in progress to the public to get feedback, gather more information or just be transparent (this has potential most of all in public service journalism and investigations). Say you want to open your notes and data up to the story sources via a wave – they can rebut one another and add more info of their own that can be used in the final story.


3. It’s a community conversation tool

The problem: You want to get conversation going about a particular topic, but your existing commenting and message board tools limit the ability to communicate with useful commenters, while allowing the conversation to be taken off-track from the original topic.

The branching nature of Google Wave makes it great for getting lots of feedback and opinions. After initially putting the topical wave out there, the creator can take the conversation in many directions. He/she can communicate with all of the waves participants or speak individually wit users within the wave (say, to get more information).

If a participant wants to go off-topi (and they will), they can create a new wavelet in the overall wave and run with it.And the best part? Google Wave is attached to your email address and, thus, your Google identity. It’s a lot closer to transparent commenting than most systems have now.

The Austin American-Statesman has been experimenting with a daily news wave, with varying degrees of success. While Social Media Editor Robert Quigley has a lot of great ideas for how to use wave, he’s still limited by the fact that even in Austin, not everyone has an invite – and if they do, not many know how to use the technology yet.

4. It’s a public Wiki or crowdsourced story

The problem: You want to involve the public in an upcoming project, but the “tell us” box with your email address in the paper or on your blog just isn’t getting much response. If it gets any, it’s in separate email conversations with several people that can’t communicate effectively with one another.

As a spin-off of the to preview ideas – why not let the public do the heavy lifting? Sure, you might not want them to write your health care coverage, but why not give them a shot at editing and writing community resources, opinion articles and reports from news events.

Say you want to publish a guide to every neighborhood in your coverage area. Post up what you have in a wave and invite the public to edit and add facts, places, photos and more. They live there – so why not let them contribute?

Or, put your paper’s work up regarding a local event, a public crime, a landmark, etc. and let outside participants add their views at every point, edit in or out details they may have observed first-hand.

This technology may also go a step further to allow readers to arrange page design from a wave. Crazy? Maybe, but it’s one of many great ideas from the LA Times’ tech blog.

Great ideas

I mentioned these above, but you have to be sure you check out these posts that have great takes on the four ideas above.

  • Riding Google Wave’s Potential – Robert Quigley (of the Statesman), has a lot of hopes for Google Wave’s potential to transform community journalism via collaboration.

Google Wave has potential for journalism – but that’s all it is right now

First of all, I’m not going to explain Google Wave, lots of others have already done that. But I’m here to say it’s worth a look as a potential new tool for journalists.

It’s a combination of the features associated with a Wiki, email, message board and chat room with options to add interactive features like maps, polls, videos and images. So what does that mean for journalists? Potentially a lot.

Depending on how Google Wave develops before it formally rolls out to the public, it could become a solution to many technology problems facing newsrooms (and tons of other businesses) today. It has the potential to become an invaluable tool for internal and external communication and collaboration.

But right now, that is just potential. I’m not going to be tell you there are no downsides – there are plenty.

1. Right now, Wave isn’t public. You have to have been invited to experience it as it is still in “preview” mode.

2. So far, Wave has a high learning curve. When you finally get in, it isn’t immediately obvious what it is used for, what the buttons do or how to even get started. And even though instructional videos and manuals exist, not many people are willing to jump through that many hopes just to use a new web program.

3. In preview, at least, Wave is buggy as all get out. The much-ballyhooed “playback” feature rarely works. It is incredibly slow to load and navigate. Because every character you type is public in a Wave, it seems to slow everything way down. For instance, I just watched a sentence I typed go in character by character, over a two-minute time span (yikes).

4. It isn’t easy to teach. If you, like me, have taught very basic web applications to reluctant  digital immigrants with upsetting results, you dread the idea of teaching this to your newsroom. I have nightmares just thinking about it.

But all of these cons I noted are about Google Wave right now. They’re still working on it – and I have high hopes it’s going to improve dramatically before it goes fully public. If it doesn’t, it’s going to be chalked up as a failed experiment and forgotten.

I have a lot of ideas I’ve either dreamed up or found on the Interwebs about ways journalists can use Google Wave I’ll be posting soon. For now, here are some resources you might find helpful if you’re trying to figure out what Google Wave is.

  • The manual: The Complete Guide to Google Wave is a wonderful, simple guide to the tool. If you don’t get all the ins and outs of the Wave (who does?) and you don’t want to sit through the whole video explainer, try this. Check out the Meet Google Wave section for some great suggested uses.
  • More: Where else would you got to learn more about Wave’s potential than Mashable? Scan over their coverage for good ideas.

And, if you’d like an invite to Google Wave and don’t have one, leave a comment and I’ll see what I can do.

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