Showing posts with label Twittersphere. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Twittersphere. Show all posts

Friday, June 5, 2009

twittersphere, take two

The Neiman Journalism Lab has a quick post on a site called Muck Rack, which aggregates tweets on journalists who tweet.

It started as "cesspool of banality", writes Zachary M. Seward, who now sees a certain amount of utlity to the site. Tweets are categorized into beats, loosely, allowing you to follow the trends that reporters are, well, following.

No matter that one of the top trends a couple weeks back happened to be Adam Lambert, the loser on "American Idol." bk

leads: twittersphere style

Mashable's Ann Handley offers a comparison of twitter to journalism in this post, aptly titled: Everything I Need to Know about Twitter I learned in J School.

It's more about style than substance -- or at least purpose -- which is where the comparison ends. Nonetheless, good points if you happen to be a twit. Or follow one.

Use what you learned about leads, heads and inverted pyramids to make tweets more effective, she writes. Here's an example:


Lead with the good stuff


In journalism, the “inverted pyramid” style places the most important information at the top of any story, and then the ensuing narrative explains and expands on it. In other words, the first paragraph should contain enough information to give the reader a solid overview of the entire story. Approach sharing links or information on Twitter in a similar manner, giving the strongest and most compelling bit in the tweet, and then link to the rest of the story elsewhere.

tweet-06

Tuesday, April 21, 2009

more on the twittersphere

Gavin Newsom held a virtual press conference sans press today -- to announce his candidacy for governor of California simultaneously on twitter, facebook and youtube. Notably absent: reporters and/or pesky questions from the rabble.

From the piece on sfgate.com, the online version the SF Chron:

"No candidate has ever used all of these tools at once - and it had to happen with a candidate from the Bay Area. This is the capital of new media," said Newsom's political consultant Eric Jaye, who noted that San Francisco-based Twitter, Palo Alto-based Facebook and San Bruno-based YouTube, now a subsidiary of Google, are all located in the region.

Jaye said the mayor has amassed some 270,000 followers on Twitter - second only to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger - as well as 40,000 on Facebook, 150,000 names on his campaign e-mail lists, and reaches thousands of others with his regular blogs on the Huffington Post and Daily Kos, two progressive Web sites.

Monday, April 20, 2009

the blogosphere atwitter

Whether or not you like Morrissey , you will find tasty food for thought re the twittersphere in this review, written by Gordie Young for the SF Weekly, of a non-concert by the former member of the Smiths. It's a short piece, but be sure to read down to the last graf. That's where the, er, meaty J questions come in.

Here's the backstory: Apparently, Morrissey blew off a concert at the Paramount in Oakland Saturday claiming illness -- a day after cutting short a concert at Coachella because the odor of cooking meat wafted his way -- but then was seen at the very same time he was supposed to be up on stage across the Bay, watching another show at the DNA Lounge in San Francisco.

None of which is all that interesting if you're not a Morrissey fan ((FTR: I am not. I refer to a friend who once characterized his music thus: "hide the knives -- I'm feeling depressed"). What IS interesting, however, is the source of the reporting -- tweets, blogs, and cell phone pix -- and the questions that arise because of it. WAS Morrissey at the DNA lounge? DID he cut short his concert at Coachella because of burnt meat? Can you trust this reporting? Should reporters report on it? How do you verify it? Is any or all of it true?

If, as Gordie posits, the story illustrates the freakish and somewhat disturbing power of twitter, you have to wonder: why is it that, when reporters' credibility is often on the line, we are so quick to trust Susie from Ohio in 140 characters or fewer?

Gordie responds:
It's all true. There are youtube links showing him walk off the stage and making the meat comments. (There are also press reports covering the Coachella show). Kristeen Young, who was performing at DNA, has commented publicly on Morrissey's presence. And there are photos of Morrissey at DNA from the various Susie's. Now who knows exactly why he canceled the show. It was officially because of "illness."

I thought this was very interesting for the very reason you stated. By journalism standards, this is all strangely sourced. Can you trust a youtube video that says it's of Morrissey at Coachella? On the other hand, can you trust a reporter for the NY Times using unnamed sources, especially if it's Judy Miller? I'm not endorsing either/or, but it is fascinating to see what a confusing time this is for journalists and the concept of the verifiable truth. And a blogger alerting fans via twitter and someone actually responding and going to DNA and confronting Morrissey is very weird.

I also think it would be interesting to speculate on how easy it would be to fake elements of this story. Then again, when newspapers dutifully reprint official statements from presidents that they know aren't true...well...that's fake news as well, right?

Again, not taking sides, but very interesting and confusing issues. Too bad this wasn't about a story that really mattered.