Blog of the Week

Digital Gran highlights three things for me. 1) Growing older does not have to mean giving up. 2) New Media really has reached so many people and given so many of them a platform. 3) If a gran can keep a blog going then we have no excuse.

Just For (A Little More) Fun

Most people in this wonderful world of journalism probably have a tendency to stray too close to the pretension line at times. Thus I thought sitting The Pretension Test may alert a few of us to our pretentiousness so that we can nip it in the bud. Give it a go.

Just For Fun

Whilst doing some research for a feature today I stumbled upon this www.pretentiouspooch.com. It's good for a laugh. The range of sweaters are quite fine but the LBD is taking it too far don't you think?

It's The Only Certainty In Life

We were set the task of writing a profile of a Cardiff Character. Someone who we thought would have an interesting life, job, outlook. I chose a funeral director. I thought that it was a job which is entirely centered on one of life's greatest taboo subjects, that is, death. And I felt that many of us have a morbid fascination with the topic...naturally we want to know.

When I found myself sat in a funeral home with a box of tissues in front of me, a catalogue of coffins to my right and a range of urns to me left, waiting for the interview to begin, I began to question my choice. Why have a put myself in this situation through my own choosing I thought.

However, it turned out to be a fascinating and rewarding experience. David Brown, the funeral director was able to put me at my ease at once - I suppose that skill is essential in his job. He explained to me how his career had enabled him to appreciate life and its brevity, the quirky requests people made for their funerals, preparing his own aunt's body for her funeral and his plans for his own funeral. I was thoroughly intrigued by the stories this man had to tell and by his passion for such an unusual job.

It really struck me that journalism will send me into many a situation that perhaps I would rather avoid. However, I'm glad that I will be pushed to my limits throughout the course of my career (much like David perhaps) and I am pleased that I will have legitimate reasons to meet fascinating people with fascinating lives that I would otherwise know nothing about.

It's A Sign Of The Times

Sarah Radford, an ex-pupil of Cardiff talked to us today about her work for www.newburytoday.com which is a news site designed to complement the local newspaper, Newbury Weekly News.

I was impressed by the standard of the site given that it has a small budget and a team of three journalists working on it. It seems to have attempted nearly all of the same initiatives as Pete Clifton has forwarded on behalf of the BBC. This really highlighted, for me, the way in which new media can make a huge difference to what news reaches what people and the different forms in which it can do so.

Sarah included in her presentation a clip of one of her bosses talking about this initiative. I was again struck by the fact that he was using all of the same lingo as Clifton and was discussing re-organising office layout to make online less of an add-on and more a fundamental part of the company as Clifton had done. New media is really going to revolutionise the news world then. I had never imagined that traditional, local papers would get involved in this but it seems that bigger changes are afoot than I had anticipated.

Online Feature Idea

Currently, for the majority of newspapers and magazines, promoting user interaction and input online is recognised as a main priority. However, certain glossies may struggle to allow the reader in without destroying their product. The prestige and escapist value of some magazines is that they cater to an imaginary audience of a beautiful, sophisticated elite and the joy of reading those magazines is imagining oneself as part of that elite. If your everyday reader starts creeping in, the illusion is destroyed.

An exploration of this phenomenon will constitute my online feature.

I will talk to:
1) Someone working for a company that is already doing a lot with user interaction:
-What initiatives are in place?
-Why are they appropriate for, and working for, that particular company?
-Whether their success points to trouble for the glossies in question?
-Should those glossies put moving with the times or protecting the identity of the product first?

2) Those working on the websites of magazines such as Vogue, Elle and Tatler
-Are they struggling in this domain?
-What initiatives have they put in place so far?
-What do they aim to do in the future.

3) A retired editor of one of these kinds of magazines to see how they feel this new move fits with the established image of the title.

4) The public to establish whether people do read these kinds of magazines for that touch of glamour in their lives-to get away from the every day.

Hopefully it will prove to be an interesting read....

The Blog Bidding War

Jeff Jarvis's column in the Media Guardian yesterday was interesting. He was crying out to companies who were trying to exploit word-of-mouth advertising on blogs to stop doing so. This form of advertising involves a company paying a popular blogger to casually make (positive) refererences to their product in their entries. He noted that this kind of advertising was really transparent and unlikely to work. I'd have to agree.

Perhaps what struck me most about the topic, however, was the fact that if bloggers are getting paid to advertise that seems to suggest that they are now regarded as professionals journalists. Their blogs are being treated as proper publications where serious advertising can go on.

Another strike in favour of citizen journalism it seems.

NB. Jeff Jarvis is a journalism professor at the City University of New York so check out his blog for an interesting read.

Sound Advice

Today we had a profile writing workshop with Julia Gregson who has written for titles including Rolling Stone and The Times. Aside from the specific advice she offered on that particular form of writing she also offered her worldly wisdom on life as a journalist. This was deeply significant for me.

Whilst Julia has clearly had a highly successful career in the industry, she told us many anecdotes about occassions on which she really messed up. What a treat to hear that everyone goes wrong sometimes.

She also said that she knew some of us might have thought we were outstanding writers before coming on the course and that we might now think that we are crap. We might get writers block. We might wonder why we're doing the course. We might be desperately jealous of fellow students who appear to be much better than us. We might turn every writing exercise into a drama. We might well feel downright miserable sometimes.

Let's just say that this struck a chord with me.

What was of comfort to me was that Julia admitted to feeling all of this herself at times. She described those silly quirks of human behaviour that most of us would like to swear we never displayed.

Her advice on such matters was quite simple. "Get Over it", she said.

Whilst on occassion these are the cruelest of words someone could say, today they offered comfort. If we're just to get over these problems then surely they can't be that bad, certainly not insurmountable.

Julia said it is natural to get upset and feel desperate when you're trying to do something that you want so badly to be good and yet you're rubbish.

Good to know.

But anyway, I'm over it.

Helping or Hindering

Some time ago Mark Brayne of the Dart Center for Journalism and Trauma talked to us about the damage that can be done to a journalist reporting on a traumatic event and the damage he can do to others through his report.

A topic that we only touched on but that was of interest to me, was the question of whether a journalist reporting on someone in distress or danger should ever attempt to step in and help.

There's the obvious human response that you should help anyone that you can. However, on the flipside, there's the thought that the report might help more people in the long run than the one person you can assist at that moment. Finally, of course, if a journalist does not know what he is doing he may get himself into a serious case of making matters worse.

I was interested to see a report on Newsround the other day which brought this issue to the my mind once more.

A team working on the Planet Earth documentary had been following a family of penguins for months. When the baby penguin fell in a hole in the ice and was sure to die, having grown rather attached to it, they stepped in and pulled it out. A similar debate on journalistic interference ensued.

So should a journalist put his human instincts aside when reporting? Or should his human instinct be telling him to stay out of things anyway?

Eavesdropping

I don't intend to make my eavesdropper feature a daily but I just had to share this one...

Where: On the walk home from JOMEC
Who: 2 randomers (American)
What: Randomer 1: "You'll never guess what they call jello over here...jelly!"
Randomer 2: "What jello?"
Randomer 1: "No jelly!"
Randomer 2: "But it's jello they call jelly?"
Randomer 1: "yes!"
Randomer 2: "ha that's weird!"

Had to laugh.

I think this speaks for itself. I would however like to suggest that you ask five people what a bun is....this will spark a comic debate that will go in silly circles like the conversation above.

I would just like to say that for me a bun is a bread roll....apparently this is controversial.

Less Haste More Speed

Pete Clifton's lecture today was reminiscent of an episode of Casulaty or Star Trek. Jargon, jargon, jargon.

The head of BBC News Interactive discussed blogs, UGC, API, Wiki Backgrounds, Aggregation Pages, podcasts and vodcasts. Many of these terms were alien/comical to me.

Clifton wasn't just spouting them at random, however. He was explaining the new interactive initiatives the BBC was launching.

However, the BBC seems so desperate to set these hi-tech wheels in motion that it appears to be launching them before they are fully, thought through. For example the offer to the audience to personalise their webpage so that they can, as Clifton said, "have more control over their experience", is underway although it cannot allow people to do all that much at the moment.

I noted in the Media Guardian an article by Richard Benson in which he voiced similar concerns for news companies in general. He said, "Our national newspapers have got their variously sized pages in a flap over competition from the internet. In the offices of several titles there now seems to be more concern with blogs, podcasts and vodcasts...than there is with actual newsgathering". Thus it seems the companies are putting these things out there without stopping to consider whether they're actually any good.

Clifton would probably argue, however, that the only way for these interactive initiatives to work is if they are tried out on the public who can give feedback to the BBC on how to refine them. There's some truth in that I suppose.

Eavesdropping

Our tutor, Tim, pointed out that snippets of overheard conversation can prove to be wonderful sources for stories. He also highlighted Jon Henley's 'Overheard'section in the Guardian which is really rather entertaining.

On the back of this, I have decided to start my own regular blog feature. I christen it 'Eavesdropping'. Yes eavesdropping does have more unfavourable connotations than overhearing but I think that's rather apt. Whilst Henley comments on comic or interesting snippets he has heard on the TV, radio etc I intend to comment on people's conversations. A little amoral? Maybe. But entertaining? Let's hope so.

So here is my first eavesdrop...

Who: A fellow student
Where: JOMEC
What: "I love making to-do lists. I add things that I have already done to them just so I can cross them off."

I loved this comment - it was a great comfort to me as I do just the same. I genuinely get a deep sense of satisfaction from crossing an item off my to-do list and so the more insignificant tasks I can pile onto it the more of that good good feeling I get.

Of course there's a big school of thought that suggests that making lists is the most concrete form of procrastination that there is. The website www.43things.com is a place where people can upload their aspirations. 51 people wish they would 'stop making lists of goals and actually do something'another 15 people want to 'stop making lists' full stop, yet more want to 'stop making lists of things that I'll never be able to put on my "accomplished" list' In fact there is a list of about 33 anti-list making desires. Oh the irony.

I liked this particularly bitter post:
"all i do at the beginning and the end of each day is make a stupid list to tell me what i already know…that i have stuff to do the next day/that day! it’s awful and almost chronic for me…and i think it’s time for it to stop..actually, i know it is! hopefully determination is enough, b/c i feel like if i didn’t make lists like i do, than i wouldn’t remember anything…it’s a rather co-dependent relationship that i have with a sheet of paper and pen."

Or how about this little gem...

"Listing sure is fun. And it does make me more conscious of what I want to—or have to—do. But it’s the actual doing part that throws me in a tizzy…"

So what's this all about? Why are we all so list crazy? I know I get it from my Dad who makes several versions of the same list prioritising the items in the main list into smaller lists. But why has it taken hold of so many people? And why are we so appalled by our listing habits? Maybe we should just succumb?

I suppose we'd have to list the pros and cons before making a hasty decision though...

Is Shorthand the Short Straw?

Who would have thought shorthand would inspire so much chit chat... How many hours a night do you practice? What dictation tape are you on? My God, how do you write 'shorthand' in shorthand? I suppose shop-talk is one thing that you never do escape when among people in your field. But shorthand? I mean that's pretty sad.

The burning issue, however, is whether shorthand really is useful. There are those who think it is out-dated and useless given the technology about today. But there are others who believe it is an essential skill that any journalist should have (or at least it scores some brownie points on the CV).

Well since shorthand isn't my arch enemy (I have to admit that I have quite a mathsy brain) I would like to think that the time I am investing in it will pay off.

I can't help but think that it will. Surely there will be times when I am not on official reporter duty but when something interesting happens. I won't have a dictaphone. What will I do? Oh yes, I'll take a quote or two down in shorthand in a pad, on a tissue, on my hand. Phew. Crisis averted.

The various media gurus that have come to speak to us have generally extolled the virtues of shorthand. However, when they are asked whether they actually use the skill they often say that, in fact, they do not.

Does this mean that shorthand is a nice part of the old-school journalist image but not really a practical tool at all?

Ah well I quite like the idea of writing in secret agent-style code anyway. How sad and geeky I hear you cry. Given that this comment is coupled with the fact that I'm talking about shorthand AGAIN I would have to agree.

Blog of the Week

This week it's all about Robot Gossip which provides news and updates from Robot society. I like this blog because it is so well put together that I'm hooked on a topic that I would normally view with distain. If you want tips on how to jazz up your blog, make the most of all it can do and make it really readable take a look.

A Picture Speaks A Thousand Words

As a journalist these days it seems to be quite important to have some skills as a photographer. We were taught some basic techniques and what follows are my attempts to apply these...

Portrait:










Landscape:










Moment in Time:

A Balancing Act

Having won a class competition I was lucky enough yesterday to enjoy a plate of profiteroles in the company of Nicholas Brett, Deputy Managing Director of BBC Magazines.

We had had to submit the one question that we would ask him if we had the chance to speak to him one-on-one. The question I had offered was, "To be successful in the magazine industry do you have to forget all of your other aspirations?"

It seemed silly, having really got the opportunity to ask him, not to do so. However, the response that I got was not quite what I had anticipated.

I suppose I had come to accept that the answer might well be the affirmative. Yet the answer I got was more of a questioning of what other aspiration I could possibly have.
What could possibly compete with a successful career in the magazine industry?

As I have become more engrossed in this course and my freelance work I have felt the pressures of time and of trying to lead a balanced life increase. I have feared that perhaps more sacrifices than I had anticipated have to be made. However, it came as a surprise to me that not only do some people in the industry make these sacrifices but that they make them gladly. Indeed, they are not seen as sacrifices at all.

Part of me feels glum hearing this. Mr Brett by no means suggested that I couldn't succeed in the industry without giving up on my other dreams. However, the thought that this feeling of compulsion, nay obsession, with journalism may well only increase scared me a little. I hope that I don't forget that there might be something else that I want as well.

Yet another part of me feels excited. To have a career for which you're happy to push yourself to the conceivable limits, that you love with such a passion, must be a wonderful thing.

The idea of a balanced life as a magazine journalist seemed to be something of an oxymoron to Nicholas Brett. I wonder, then, do I try to walk the tightrope or am I just facing an inevitable fall?

But Some Are More Equal Than Others

Having reflected more on Dr Meadows's presentation and having received some interesting comments from fellow students I have decided to blog on the matter again. I'm afraid I am not one to let sleeping dogs lie.

A few people had the thought after the lecture that, whilst Dr Meadows was promoting the idea that everyone has a story to tell which they should have the opportunity to tell, he seemed to be overlooking the fact that not all of these stories would necessarily be very interesting.

With this I have to agree. However, what particularly struck me was the fact that the way the digital videos have been used itself suggested this. Dr Meadows made the comment, "I'm quite in favour of digital stories being used selectively". That is, whilst all of them get stored in an archive, not all of them make it onto the TV or radio.

To me this is in effect saying that everyone should have a voice but that some of them will be hushed up later.

Dr Meadows complained that the big media giants pretended to let their audience in with comments pages and blogs but that they were never really giving up any power. However, I wonder whether this is not the way things have to be? In even the most noble of projects surely someone will decide that certain people simply cannot have the chance to have a voice? Maybe the quality of the media depends on this?

Again I felt it was time to go into discussion with Dr Meadows. He said, "Ooops. Do I glimpse a rancid slice of something that looks horribly like snobbery here? ... If you believe in democracy (and the media's role as the fourth estate) then you must allow that every individual in our society is special: curious, interesting... wonderful even, anyway worth listening to".

I'm not sure whether I entirely agree with this. I know that I should but do I? I would love to get Dale, Meadows, Burton and myself together to thrash this one out.

Dr Meadows' response to the idea that the Digital Stories project was not abiding by it's own priciples was met. He noted that all the videos have an online audience which was all that could ever be promised. The TV and radio being a bonus. "Of course, if I had my way all the Capture Wales Digital Stories would go on terrestrial TV and at peak time too. But I don't have my way," he said. Still, he concluded, "We've come long way and, I think, we've brought a lot of people with us."

Is Journalism Elitist?

After Dr Daniel Meadows lectured to us today I felt like having a tantrum.

Believing, "The age of doing journalism to people is over,"he pioneered BBC Wales's Digital Stories which offers people the opportunity to make a video for the website and possibly the TV or radio.

Excellent though the videos are, I grapple with the thinking behind them. Contra Burton, Dr Meadows said, "I do believe everyone has a story to tell" and he discussed how journalists had to provide people the opportunity to tell them.

Here comes the tantrum ... Why must the journalist give everyone a go? People have stories to tell but surely the journalist is not being elitist if he reserves the right to craft those stories? The surgeon, after all, is not criticised for not handing his knife to a novice.

I put these ideas to Dr Meadows. "I don't want all of media to be constructed out of viewer offerings...There's room for us all in this expanding media world but just now there is an imbalance in favour of media professionals," he said.

He stressed that whilst this inbalance was expected in a profession like medicine, journalism was different. He said, "Journalists claim to represent "the people" and yet they haven't been elected to their jobs. They have just assumed a gatekeeping role for themselves."

Finally, he said, "If you are illiterate or disadvantaged then the choice to become a journalist is not one that is open to you."

That (sort of) told me.

Power to the People?!

I tell myself that an interest in conflict is a mark of a good journalist not just perversity. Still, I think it is human nature to have a macabre fascination in a good fight. Thus I won’t fabricate excuses before telling you about my curiosity in discovering a gulf between the opinions of Richard Burton (who spoke to us yesterday) and Mr Dale (who lectured a couple of weeks ago).

Burton, former editor of Telegraph.co.uk, was quick to pooh-pooh the thought that the blog is marvellous in offering a mouthpiece to the masses. “The idea of everyone having a voice….hmmm,” he said.

He remembered conversing with some young journalists who told him they couldn’t wait to share their ideas with the world. His response: “no one is interested in your view.”

Burton said, “People are more interested in what Chantelle off Big Brother has to say than me”.

So I wonder is Dale, who extols the virtues of everyone having a voice, overlooking an important factor, i.e. that not everyone has something of interest to say?

There are, of course, plenty of people who do have fascinating ideas and the blogosphere offers them the opportunity to share them.

However, is this missing the point? The question is whether what someone says can be interesting unless they have a standpoint from which to say it? That is, can Joe Blogger ever have anything interesting to say about medicine, politics or fashion compared to a medic, politician or fashionista?