Blog from WeMedia
21/05/06 13:14
Why these events fail - but why they're worth trying
05/05/06 09:31
Spent most (not all) of the day at the WeMedia forum. Tried to realtime blog some of it - tricky to do while listening hard, trying to watch and add to the chat.
See the Cybersoc blog
http://www.cybersoc.com/2006/05/wemedia_confere.html
For an excellent realtime blog from Robin Hamman - nice one! I'm not going to try and blog like that today on the assumption that I'll be able to link to the work of other bloogers.
These events fail because the world views of the participants are too divergent. And there's a resource and operational quality gap. Obviously the global reach of Reuters and the BBC needs huge resources - but also they have to operate to a certain level of quality in terms of delivery. Wheras we make stuff work on a shoe string - and we don't have 'management process'.
But we still have to do this because the message about power and participation in the media needs to be delivered - even if it remains in the 'do not open until Christmas' box. And we have to take the message to their territory. Because they don't come to us.
Communicating about the issues is important - and events like this are very difficult. It's worth trying.
See the Cybersoc blog
http://www.cybersoc.com/2006/05/wemedia_confere.html
For an excellent realtime blog from Robin Hamman - nice one! I'm not going to try and blog like that today on the assumption that I'll be able to link to the work of other bloogers.
These events fail because the world views of the participants are too divergent. And there's a resource and operational quality gap. Obviously the global reach of Reuters and the BBC needs huge resources - but also they have to operate to a certain level of quality in terms of delivery. Wheras we make stuff work on a shoe string - and we don't have 'management process'.
But we still have to do this because the message about power and participation in the media needs to be delivered - even if it remains in the 'do not open until Christmas' box. And we have to take the message to their territory. Because they don't come to us.
Communicating about the issues is important - and events like this are very difficult. It's worth trying.
Richard Sambrook
03/05/06 16:01
"There is a real digital divide out there and I'm convinced about that"
Despite all the connectivity, the range of stories seems to be diminishing. This is a real issue. Connectivity brings its own obligations - to allow room for depth and consideration.
The BBC has to be about 'appreciation' even of niche interests. Need to find ways for the 'long tail' of content provision.
The panel on citizen journalism is interesting - news is being broken on the web. Need to recognise that many people will know more about the issue than the broadcaster does - this means we need to 'reach out' to those who have that expertise and incorporate it properly in the way we develop content.
Q - from a journalist and blogger from Germany - what is the BBC going to do to organise sources that may not need the BBC as a gatekeeper.
A - We want people to look at other sources - it's a choice. BBC needs to judge its success by what people say about what you do. Our audiences are increasing. In the end that's how we're judged. We're not 'fighting off' the idea of other media.
Q - Jan [Chaffer? could n't hear] What about hyper-local journalism?
A - Lots of ways of feeding in to views (Global Voices is fantastic). Very local broadband TV is very interesting - and developing.
Q - to what extent is the language of content provider and audience outmoded?
A - Lots of people want to buy a sandwich (rather than make their own). There is value in preparation and packaging - many media organisations attract a mass audience. This is not likely to change in the short term.
Despite all the connectivity, the range of stories seems to be diminishing. This is a real issue. Connectivity brings its own obligations - to allow room for depth and consideration.
The BBC has to be about 'appreciation' even of niche interests. Need to find ways for the 'long tail' of content provision.
The panel on citizen journalism is interesting - news is being broken on the web. Need to recognise that many people will know more about the issue than the broadcaster does - this means we need to 'reach out' to those who have that expertise and incorporate it properly in the way we develop content.
Q - from a journalist and blogger from Germany - what is the BBC going to do to organise sources that may not need the BBC as a gatekeeper.
A - We want people to look at other sources - it's a choice. BBC needs to judge its success by what people say about what you do. Our audiences are increasing. In the end that's how we're judged. We're not 'fighting off' the idea of other media.
Q - Jan [Chaffer? could n't hear] What about hyper-local journalism?
A - Lots of ways of feeding in to views (Global Voices is fantastic). Very local broadband TV is very interesting - and developing.
Q - to what extent is the language of content provider and audience outmoded?
A - Lots of people want to buy a sandwich (rather than make their own). There is value in preparation and packaging - many media organisations attract a mass audience. This is not likely to change in the short term.
Panel missed the issues - level of debate too 'corporate'
03/05/06 11:11
Have to leave the conference to do an unmovable meeting and sitting on the tube thinking about the session.
It seems to me that the panel missed the issues - not necessarily their fault as the chair didn't really challenge them enough.
When you read the brief notes I took below (and I was monitoring and commenting on the live chat as well) - you'll see the issue of 'trust' kept coming up. I thought that the debate was maybe conducted on the 'wrong' level; I'll explain what I mean.
Trust seemed to be a binary concept for most of the commentators (as in I trust you or I don't . . .). David Brain of Edelman got a bit closer to the shading and continuous gradation of 'trust' that emerges in the WE media world. David Schlesinger from Reuters meant 'trusted sources'. Other panelists confused 'trust' and 'truth'.
The spectrum I see is moderated/mediated by aspects of control about what we see, when we see it and who produces it. It goes from implicit trust (I trust you because of who or what you are; say the BBC or Reuters) through trust earned on the basis of shared or collaborative experience to what I think of as 'healthy distrust'. The experience of many people is beginning to move them away from the implicit trust previously placed in institutions like the BBC through to a more negotiated basis for trust. To that end, the thought that some sources are inherently trustworthy (like old established media) and some are inherently untrustworthy (like blogs) is nugatory and so the debate (which is what it ended up as with the panel) is conducted at the wrong level.
It seems to me that the panel missed the issues - not necessarily their fault as the chair didn't really challenge them enough.
When you read the brief notes I took below (and I was monitoring and commenting on the live chat as well) - you'll see the issue of 'trust' kept coming up. I thought that the debate was maybe conducted on the 'wrong' level; I'll explain what I mean.
Trust seemed to be a binary concept for most of the commentators (as in I trust you or I don't . . .). David Brain of Edelman got a bit closer to the shading and continuous gradation of 'trust' that emerges in the WE media world. David Schlesinger from Reuters meant 'trusted sources'. Other panelists confused 'trust' and 'truth'.
The spectrum I see is moderated/mediated by aspects of control about what we see, when we see it and who produces it. It goes from implicit trust (I trust you because of who or what you are; say the BBC or Reuters) through trust earned on the basis of shared or collaborative experience to what I think of as 'healthy distrust'. The experience of many people is beginning to move them away from the implicit trust previously placed in institutions like the BBC through to a more negotiated basis for trust. To that end, the thought that some sources are inherently trustworthy (like old established media) and some are inherently untrustworthy (like blogs) is nugatory and so the debate (which is what it ended up as with the panel) is conducted at the wrong level.
The issues of trust
03/05/06 11:07
Blogging from Studio 1 of the BBC's TV Centre
Trust is in play - what does it mean and how is it shifting?
Jeremy Vine - video on the results of the survey. [Good opportunity for him to rehearse for the local elections . . . in the UK tomorrow]
In the UK and USA more people trust the government than the media - other way round in the rest of the world - especially Nigeria and Egypt.
TV dominant across all ages, with young people trusting the internet as a source more than they do the newspapers.
Blogs - split on level of trust - 25% trust versus 38% don't trust blogs in the USA. Are blogs inherently untrustworthy?
Panel
Nihal Arthanyake - Musician and Radio 1 DJ
Karen - Stephenson - Media Center
David Brain - Edelman
David Schlesinger - Reuters
DS - the medium is not the issue - it's about facts, witness and opinion. TV is about witness. Blogging is also about witness. How is message effectively delivered?
DB - many people don't know or have experience of blogging - so it's not surprising that there is a lack of trust.
KS - It's inconsistent - the survey - about all sides vs accuracy. Stating the bias is part of transparency.
Nihal - I work with people not in the mainstream media - they trust the BBC News - but not Fox News for example. Don't mistake the purpose of the various sources.
DS - volume of material available makes access to content different now. But we still need to verify the source and provenance of the news and opinion we are transmitting.
KS - we are a long way along across the virtual divide.
DB - blogging has changed the way in which corporates behave. Potential to influence the way big companies behave.
Q - from audience - viewpoint of media has narrowed - there isn't digital inclusion and this is an issue.
DS - says the role of journalism is to try to make sure as many voices as possible come across
Power of the web can break new bands and deliver new ways of accessing music for example.
DB - looking at the issue of trust - it goes NGO, Business, government. Democratistion of trust.