Comments on: Solutions for Journalism, or Re-Creating a Priesthood? http://mediactive.com/2009/10/19/solutions-for-journalism-or-re-creating-a-priesthood/ Creating a User's Guide to Democratized Media Fri, 19 Mar 2010 13:16:28 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Chris Dymond http://mediactive.com/2009/10/19/solutions-for-journalism-or-re-creating-a-priesthood/#comment-972 Chris Dymond Mon, 02 Nov 2009 17:23:44 +0000 http://mediactive.com/?p=799#comment-972 I'm not a media expert or professional journalist. I am a technologist who has an interest in how information is presented and consumed in general. However, for what it's worth, I totally agree with you - I think we need a bunch of things, including a "Journalist discovery engine" (which I blogged about a while ago - http://www.chrisdymond.com/2009/06/wheres-our-journalist-discovery-engine/ ) and some other things like a means of tracking 'things in which I have a stake' such as journalistic projects I'm supporting and a properly thought out and integrated micropayments system to reward journalistic efforts and support projects we want to see succeed (I should blog about those ideas too when I get the time). But the key to these is not technology, but interface as they need to engender user *behaviours* that encourage appropriate payment to the people producing the artifacts. This is what is needed to a) allow quality journalism to happen without the need for expensive umbrella media organisations; and b) to encourage emerging institutions that provide much needed 'vertical' authority and fact-checking to allow people to appropriately evaluate what they are reading. The last thing that's needed are nationalised newspapers. I’m not a media expert or professional journalist. I am a technologist who has an interest in how information is presented and consumed in general. However, for what it’s worth, I totally agree with you – I think we need a bunch of things, including a “Journalist discovery engine” (which I blogged about a while ago – http://www.chrisdymond.com/2009/06/wheres-our-journalist-discovery-engine/ ) and some other things like a means of tracking ‘things in which I have a stake’ such as journalistic projects I’m supporting and a properly thought out and integrated micropayments system to reward journalistic efforts and support projects we want to see succeed (I should blog about those ideas too when I get the time). But the key to these is not technology, but interface as they need to engender user *behaviours* that encourage appropriate payment to the people producing the artifacts.

This is what is needed to a) allow quality journalism to happen without the need for expensive umbrella media organisations; and b) to encourage emerging institutions that provide much needed ‘vertical’ authority and fact-checking to allow people to appropriately evaluate what they are reading.

The last thing that’s needed are nationalised newspapers.

]]> By: Howard Weaver http://mediactive.com/2009/10/19/solutions-for-journalism-or-re-creating-a-priesthood/#comment-784 Howard Weaver Sat, 24 Oct 2009 10:23:35 +0000 http://mediactive.com/?p=799#comment-784 If you think yesterday's newspapers were arrogant and unresponsive, wait till you deal with publicly funded newspapers. \-\/\/ If you think yesterday’s newspapers were arrogant and unresponsive, wait till you deal with publicly funded newspapers.

\-\/\/

]]> By: BMoreKarl http://mediactive.com/2009/10/19/solutions-for-journalism-or-re-creating-a-priesthood/#comment-767 BMoreKarl Thu, 22 Oct 2009 03:28:04 +0000 http://mediactive.com/?p=799#comment-767 Anybody see a troubling trend in this administration – the Executive Branch in particular seems to be flirting with the idea of defining who is and who isn’t covered by the First Amendment protection of the free press. With the whole War on Fox News – i find it disturbing that first the FTC and now Administration officials are saying who is and who isn’t the press. Definition is a form of regulation. You have no say in the Matter. I can say Fox News is not what they say they are, but you, Mr. Obama-Flunky can not! Anybody see a troubling trend in this administration – the Executive Branch in particular seems to be flirting with the idea of defining who is and who isn’t covered by the First Amendment protection of the free press.

With the whole War on Fox News – i find it disturbing that first the FTC and now Administration officials are saying who is and who isn’t the press.

Definition is a form of regulation. You have no say in the Matter. I can say Fox News is not what they say they are, but you, Mr. Obama-Flunky can not!

]]> By: Steve Buttry http://mediactive.com/2009/10/19/solutions-for-journalism-or-re-creating-a-priesthood/#comment-757 Steve Buttry Mon, 19 Oct 2009 21:06:02 +0000 http://mediactive.com/?p=799#comment-757 Dan, I agree that we'll be far better off letting the market work than turning to the government for solutions. Whatever Downie & Schudson or anyone else proposes, the actual legislation enacting their ideas for federal help will go through Congress. And we've seen in the shield legislation how they will try to define who gets the federal pork. I have blogged on my criticism of the report: http://stevebuttry.wordpress.com/2009/10/19/american-media-need-innovation-not-subsidy/ Dan, I agree that we’ll be far better off letting the market work than turning to the government for solutions. Whatever Downie & Schudson or anyone else proposes, the actual legislation enacting their ideas for federal help will go through Congress. And we’ve seen in the shield legislation how they will try to define who gets the federal pork. I have blogged on my criticism of the report:
http://stevebuttry.wordpress.com/2009/10/19/american-media-need-innovation-not-subsidy/

]]>