Investigative reporting 3.0–or, Web stalking

The following is based on an Investigative Reporters and Editors seminar this weekend in Birmingham, Alabama.

IRE talked about how the Web--both the Surface ("visible") and Deep ("invisible") Webs--can help reporters address the occupational hazard of having to know everything about anything at any given moment.

The hour-long presentation, Effective use of the Internet, was fittingly framed by the first word in the title. Mark Horvit, IRE’s executive director, began by emphasizing that reporters should approach online research armed with a strategy (i.e., key words to search and a general idea of what’s available and desirable) to avoid getting distracted by the Web’s potentially cavernous detours. Step one, Horvit said, is not to log on, but to sketch out a plan.

Important for every investigative journalist to know about search engines is that a Google search, for example, does not look through the actual Internet, per se. It searches Google’s servers, which are stocked with information that the search engine company’s Web “crawlers” have found and stored.

What they’re missing – eye-opening stats:

• Google searches far less than half of what’s out there
• Total shared results of any two search engines: 8.9 percent
• Any three search engines: 2.2 percent
• Above figures from 2007 study by Dogpile, Penn State and Queensland University of Technology
• Some estimate the “invisible” Web is 550 times bigger than the “visible” Web.
• Google says more than 1,000 federal government sites can’t be crawled.

If (way) more than half the Web isn’t showing up in a search engine result, then it is important for investigative reporters to know where to go to find it. Here are some of the principles behind efficiently conducting those searches, with both superficial tools and subterraneous means.

Surface Web – Savvy searching tips:

• Treat info online as one would any source (confirm)
• Find out who owns the Web site
• Know Google advanced search options (esp. domain and file type)
• Archived Web: Gone doesn’t mean forever. (Google cache, Wayback Machine)
• Consult at least two other search engines–each has its own strengths and weaknesses.
• People finders (i.e., www.pipl.com, www.whitepages.com, etc.)
• Social media searches (i.e., www.whostalkin.com… Who’s Talkin’, not Who Stalkin’… or so they say)
• Use Wikipedia for the footnotes only

The session then took Web searches to the next level… well, at least a step above what amateur voyeurs might use to get information.

Deep Web – Search like a pro:

• Know what search engines typically miss (databases, content behind firewalls and registration screens, ASP/dynamically generated pages, Robo.txt excluded pages)
• The information is out there, but the key is to find organizations that make is more easily accessible. Bookmark these!
• Directories by and for journalists (‘Net Tour and Reporter’s Desktop)
• Know the gateways to public records
• Pipl actually claims to access the Deep Web. Try it. Pipl yourself. It’s scary how much information it digs up with just a name.
• The census is your friend, especially in 2010
• To get fully submerged… go to IRE’s Web site!

I’m not going to copy-paste in this post all of the useful links for discovering the “hidden Web” and the “dead Web,” which were hyper-linked in the PowerPoint presentation that Mark offered to send out to anybody at the day-long seminar who asked for it. All of this stuff is available at the organization’s site, and I can see what the nominal membership fees pay for, seriously.

Filed under: Investigative journalism, New media technology , cache, census, deep Web, Dogpile, Google search, hidden Web, Internet, Investigative Reporters and Editors, invisible Web, IRE, Pipl, search engines, surface Web, visible Web, watchdog journalism, Wayback Machine, Whostalkin, Wikipedia

Tehnology and convergence media

Owners of hand-held communication devices are known by their enthusiasm for their “apps.”

Last night I watched CNBC’s “Planet of the Apps: A Handheld Revolution.” Although the report mainly focused on the profitablity of the apps market and how the “small applications – or apps – that fit on our mobile phone do everything from helping us accomplish mundane tasks to keeping us entertained while we wait for the bus,” it also delved into how the technology is changing society.

But technology doesn’t change society, people change society… at least, that’s how it should be.

For example, cell phones, although they had texting capabilities, were not originally designed for sending frequent text messages. Users drove that innovation.

From CNBC.com's Top-Selling Non-Gaming Apps of 2009: No. 3 Textfree Unlimited Send unlimited free texts for a whole year to any US mobile phone. Replies are free, too. Category: Lifestyle Seller: Pinger, Inc. Price: $5.99 Requirements: iPhone OS 2.2 or later, iPod Touch

Apple tapped into that user-driven model of innovation with the iPhone and App Store, in which companies and individuals can write their own app software and make it available to the public at the price they determine. The impressive results, which apparently surprised even Apple, have been well documented and analysts project the success will continue to accelerate.

In “Planet of the Apps” I saw evidence of a user generated paradigm shift similar to that of the texting cell phone. The popular “Bump” app (which lucked out in being the 1 millionth app downloaded from the App Store) has the technology of enabling devices carrying the app to “talk” to each other. Thus, while users currently “bump” their devices for simple exchanges such as photos, contact info and other data, the app could potentially be used for more formal social exchanges, mundane and otherwise, such as making a purchase by “bumping” your device to a register.

One of the experts interviewed in the hour-long report said that apps are the ultimate “instant gratification,” but I beg to differ. The mobility of these devices essentially transcends conventional conceptions of space, so why wouldn’t we also need to reconceptualize our notions of time as well. Again, it depends on the user.

For example, my husband was finally allowed to purchase an iPhone (and I hope he isn’t downloading the same first-person shooter games that he put on my iPhone or reading this blog.) Beside the occasional penguins bombing igloos,  the huz is great at identifying good, useful apps. Before a road trip to Canada, he suped up my iPhone with everything I needed, including navigational help, mileage calculator, cheap gas locater, a packing reminder list and more.

Even six months ago, he knew that the key to a good app was location-awareness, which is something I’ve picked up on in the industry mainstream discourse only recently. So it didn’t surprise me at all when the huz said I had to get the AroundMe app. Many are saying that what is the greatest step forward in the much anticipated/heavily speculated iTablet/iSlate is its hyper-local capabilities.

“Smartphones,” as they are often called—a name which will will recede from our vocabulary with the advent of Apple iTablet/iSlate and its ilk—are leading us into the next generation of computing, e-reading, mobile gaming, TV viewing and news and information delivery/gathering. The ultimate convergence device… until the next advance in technology, at least.

Thus, the smartphone needs a new name. Until we develop the capability of projected 3D “screens” like Minority Report, Iron Man or Avatar, I’m calling my handheld my finger-smudge device.

Filed under: New media technology , App Store, apps, AroundMe, Bump, convergence, iPhone, iSlate, iTablet, media, Planet of the Apps: A Handheld Revolution, smartphones, technology, texting

Time for ‘where we get our news’ in 2010

The State of the Media 2010 is still months away… but I’m already thinking about the marked difference that we should see in this year’s report.

Off the top of my head I can’t recall that any of the past thoroughly-researched status updates on journalism (way more than 144 characters, btw) fully realized how mobile news media could, and had to, become.

The news Apps concept was still beta, iPhones and Kindles were (and are) still in relatively early-adopter stages and ad-giant Google hadn’t unveiled its Nexus One.

This is the future of how we get our news: at our fingertips.

The way I see it, the one weakness of online news that magazines and newspapers still had going for them was portability. Even my laptop can’t go everywhere I can take my Tuscaloosa News or Newsweek without risking damage or loss. But my iPhone can (in most cases)

It’s like the old saw in home-buying is also true for news delivery: location, location, location; except now your news real estate transcends space… and is extremely time sensitive. Technology has made this possible, news. Befriend it, then go forth and multiply.

Filed under: Delivery, Future of Journalism, New media technology, State of news media , consumers, delivery methods, formerly known as audience, how people get news, mobile communications, news consumption, news on- the-go, producers, sources, State of news media, where people get news in 2010

Human Rights: History, definition and reality

Nuance is a word that is getting thrown around a lot these days. Sometimes it is just a fancy label for excessive relativism, and almost always it is a sure sign that ahead lies an infinitely complicated conundrum. Nuance typically means the mess on the surface is completely frivolous when compared to the conflict’s underlying issues and assumptions.

When it comes to the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the chasm that seems to separate the document’s becoming a set of ratified laws from its current state as a broad statement of unenforceable principles seems too big to be called nuanced, but it is deceptively so.

There is ten-minute video called The Story of Human Rights from Youth for Human Rights International, which illustrates how confounding the topic of human rights is… in large part because it is so nebulous.

The Cyrus Cyllinder freed the Jews in Babylon from slavery and granted them freedom of religion in 539 B.C.

Mixing animation with person-on-the-street interviews, the video recounts the progression of human rights beginning with Cyrus the Great’s decision to free the slaves of Babylon, to the Magna Carta, to the U.N.’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights… It asks the question, if Rome’s “Natural Law” became France’s “Natural Rights” became the U.N.’s “Human Rights,” who, now, will make it “Human Law”?

The video leaves out, however, the perspective that the reason the U.N.’s code is only a declaration and not yet law is because the nations that value human rights do not want to compromise these ultimate rights, and they fear this would happen in negotiating a codified set of human rights laws.

Youth for Human Rights International seems to grasp the importance of individuals knowing and understanding the history of human rights in order to effectively contribute to the discourse on these issues. Bonus points for making such an artful advancement in this discourse, but the conversation can’t stop there.

The video begins with simple and all-important question: “what are human rights?” Yet, by the end of the video, it doesn’t seem to have reached a basic, conclusive answer. Could this be, perhaps, because the conversation must start at an even deeper level?

Wouldn’t we have to agree on the reality of human nature before we can, as the video says, attempt to make human rights a reality?

Filed under: Broader picture , Cyrus the Great, Magna Carta, Story of Human Rights, U.N. Decelaration of Human Rights, Youth for Human Rights International

Social media queen: Her take on the Internet scene

Avid blogger and media socialite Sholeh Loehle answers questions about her Internet experiences and impressions.

SHOLEH’S SOCIAL MEDIA CRED

• Classmates – 2002
• Friendster – 2003
• Myspace – 2004
• Facebook – 2005
• Flickr – 2005
• Skype – 2005
• Twitter – 2007

Q 1: When new social media spring up, how do you determine whether to use or ignore? Are there some that you use for whatever reason (all your friends do) that you don’t like? Vice versa?

Blogging was my first love, really, and I don’t think I’ll ever give it up.  I’ve been a fairly early adopter for many social networking sites, encouraged by friends who are also early adopters.  I think it is easier to get into this stuff if you have a group of people around you who are enthusiastic about it.

The first thing for me is usability in a site.  If it is clunky or awkward, I generally don’t use a site.  I don’t like paying for services, but I did pay to have a full account on Livejournal for a few years, and I still pay for a Flickr pro account.

I use Facebook, but I have so many friends on the site now that it is information overload.  Quite frankly, I use it more like an address book these days, as I simply don’t have the time to look at everything people post (nor do I care!).

Q 2: Talk about blogging, which you’ve done in some shape or form since early 2001. What kind of evolution have you seen in this trend? How did your early ‘Web log’ experiments prepare you for flickr, facebook, Twitter?

Originally I had a very primitive website where I would write thoughts, but there wasn’t enough room there.  One of my friends who lived in Georgia had a Livejournal, and he suggested that I start journaling there.  In those days the term “blog” was rarely, if ever, used.  We were all very trusting and open.  I still have everything I wrote then, but a few years back I made everything private.  The ramblings of a 17 year old are not something that I necessarily want floating around the internet.

I was on an internet forum back in 2001 that a friend of mine started called Bahaiyouth.com, which was a religious community for young people who were Bahá’ís or interested in the Bahá’í Faith.  It was the early days of avatars and profiles, and I was quite active on the forum.  I made a number of friends around the world through that site, and my communication with them probably made me more inclined to use social networking sites.  Interestingly enough, I can probably name at least 10 people that I knew on the site then that continue to be active social networkers, and who are still friends of mine.

Q 3: What do you think is the future for online social media? How is the direction the technology is moving in decided?

I still prefer blogs.  Maybe I’m “old-fashioned”, but I have a hard time connecting with people through all of the chatter.  I like well thought-out posts, being able to see the evolution of someone’s thought process, and the “permanence” of blogs.  I use Twitter daily, as do many of my friends, but I don’t always like it.

I think that users are moving toward mobile usage.  We all like having things instantly.  I was at a dinner in March, someone asked a question that no one knew the answer to, and 10 people pulled out iPhones to look it up.  The combination of users, companies, and innovative new media is driving our usage.  Could most of us have imagined Twitter in 2006? No, but now it is part of our cultural vocabulary.

Filed under: Social media , blogging, Classmates, early adopter, facebook, flickr, Friendster, Internet, Livejournal, MySpace, networking, rules, Sholeh Loehle, Skype, Social media, Twitter

Generation divide in news consumption

Watch Media Generations Inside VOA. Click here.

After reading Shea’s post I surfed around VOA’s Web site and was also especially captivated by Nico’s Off the Beaten Path pieces. For the Knight Fellows, given our conversations about reaching younger audiences, I recommend watching the Media Generations at VOA video (click on the image above). The reporter chosen as the face of the young media consumer is talking about his smartphone. He speaks to some of Daniel’s ideas about credibility and authenticity, as well as how news makers can reach him, if they choose to listen…

Filed under: Delivery, Future of Journalism , media differences across generations, news on smartphones, Voice of America

Captive news audience: from college newspapers to smartphone users

Many things can be found on a college campus that don’t exist anywhere else. Masses of people hidden behind broadsheets reading their school newspapers is one of them. At a time when most print media are hemorrhaging readers, local and national dailies must be looking jealously at their campus cousins, wondering why their popularity doesn’t carry over with grads as they matriculate into the real world.
It’s true that students make a captive audience for their campus media. The  newspapers are distributed next to classrooms and food courts, and students don’t have much of a choice in paying for them as the fee is included in their tuition. But if they were not genuinely interested in reading about their campus community, they would find a way to avoid even touching the school paper. The fact that they do just the opposite tells us something. If relevant news can be delivered conveniently–that is, as convenient as having it delivered into your line of sight–without thinking about how much you are paying for it, then people will read. Avidly.
There is another medium that students are notoriously captivated by, which educators, parents and others rank high on their list of “what’s wrong with young people today”… cell phones.
While many accuse cell phones of “making society stupid,” the devices now do so much more than merely dial phone numbers. This ain’t your mother’s cellular phone, as they say.
Some now call them smart phones. And why not? They can bring a weather radar of your neighborhood right to the palm of your hand. They can tell you driving directions, updating when you take a wrong turn, and they know where to get the least expensive gas on your way. They can even morph into a level and other handy tools for making sure you’re drilling in a straight shelf!
But any cynic who sees a washing machine that still won’t do the laundry for her where others see a washing machine with all its bells and whistles would say that a smart phone is only as good as its user. This is true of any technology, as has been discussed previously on this blog.
This post, however, is primarily concerned with the implication these smart phones have for news media. Mobile devices create a captive audience in their owner, as many have noted with dismay. So why not explore a robust model of delivering news to the palms of people’s hands? Recipients can specify what kind of news they want, when and how, and journalists can rejoice is reclaiming their audience.

It will be just like when they read their college paper, but better.
And if you are into that kind of thing, advertisements on smartphones seem to be having some success.

Here is some of the buzz on the Internet about journalism and smartphones.

Reporting News With a Cell Phone
The Emergence of Citizen Journalism Through Handheld Media Devices
http://medialiteracy.suite101.com/article.cfm/reporting_news_with_a_cell_phone

TED talk: Clay Shirky, The end of top-down control of news, the beginning of mobile news media
http://www.ted.com/talks/clay_shirky_how_cellphones_twitter_facebook_can_make_history.html
“Shirky, a prescient voice on the Internet’s effects, argues that emerging technologies enabling loose collaboration will change the way our society works.”

Nielsen: Smartphones To Be Majority of Cell Phones By 2011
http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=117275

The Wall Street Journal was talking about advertising’s natural fit with the iPhone back in May…
http://mobile2.wsj.com/device/article.php?mid=&CALL_URL=online.wsj.com/article/SB124208325352208449.html

… and the Nieman Journalism Lab blog picked up the conversation:
http://www.niemanlab.org/2009/05/cheap-effective-ads-look-to-smart-phones/

And apparently Mizzou’s J-school students are now required to have an iPhone or Touch
http://www.podcastingnews.com/2009/05/11/mizzou-jschool-iphone-require/

Some iPhone Apps for Newspapers:
http://www.thetoylounge.com/newspapers/

Blog post about local newspapers going iPhone through an application from Verve:
http://www.technologygear.net/local-newspapers-will-be-viewed-on-iphone.html

Still, there is no need to rush to come up with cute names. Think about how silly the person who coined “computer-assisted reporting” must feel:
http://www.amirkurtovic.com/2009/07/smartphone-journalism/
http://www.advancingthestory.com/2007/11/15/pocket-journalism-via-smartphone/

Filed under: Delivery, New media technology , advertisement, campus newspapers, Clay Shirly, hand-held devices, iPhone applications, journalism, mobile communication, New York Times, news media, newspapers, Nielsen, Nieman Journalism Lab, smartphones, TEC talk, technology, Wall Street Journal

Riding the Tuscaloosa Trolley, a multimedia report

Using SoundSlides takes practice. Now I think I’ve got it!
For this project, the sound was mixed using GarageBand, the photos were taken with a Canon 30D and Rebel XTI and the images edited using PhotoShop. If I want to hand this project over with my story to get a multimedia package published, I’ll probably have to re-do the slide show using the real deal instead of the demo.
I hope this can reach a wider audience, in which case this would be a sneak peak… enjoy the bus ride!
You know you remember the song…

Click on title image or here to go to SoundSlides presentation.

Filed under: New media technology , Alabama, mass transportation, multimedia, public transit, riding the bus, SoundSlides, Tuscaloosa Trolley

Analyzing, synthesizing news media

I’ve heard that it is now illegal to move castles in France. The law apparently came about after a man bought a French castle, had it disassembled and moved piece by piece to China, where he reconstructed the entire thing.
This is the picture that flashed in my mind when I read the title of the recent manifesto on the future of news reporting from Michael Schudson and Leonard Downey, Jr.: The Reconstruction of American Journalism
In constructing journalism online are we also just rebuilding old structures?
Incidentally, a similar castle metaphor once gave me an insight into the importance of localized community in the evolving concept of news media. I was participating in a wonderful FUNDAEC course called “Discourse on Social Action” and came to the last chapter. The text pointed out that we should not assume that the over-populated metropolitan cities will be the model of society for the future (especially in this modern age of instant global communication). Perhaps the city center, it went on to suggest, has outlived its usefulness just as the castles and fiefdoms of the European middle ages ceased to serve their purpose. Reading this I could just imagine peasants and nobles surveying their existence and believing civilization would always continue in such way.

This is why the parallels many are drawing between the early days of Television to the current developments in new media resonate with me. Human reticence to change is repeating itself. In the beginning of TV, producers simply broadcast filmed radio shows or stage plays. It wasn’t until later that society could imagine something different. Here are two blogs that illustrate this point better than I have: Newsweek and Alchemical Musings

If you are looking for some of the interesting discourse (i.e. buzz) related to the Reconstruction report, here are some other sources where I started:

Schudson and Downey’s WaPo editorial ‘Finding a new model for news reporting’

NY Times Media & Advertising ‘Online Rally May Sidestep Newspapers’

Poynter Online NewsPay’s ‘Mutualizing News about News’

Filed under: Future of Journalism, Metaphor , changing times for journalists, future of newspapers, news business model, online news media, Reconstruction of American Journalism

CoverItLive… before it’s dead.

Speed is valued in news delivery, but not so much so that the public no longer wants information and ideas adapted to their news needs. If that were the case, journalists would really be out of a job. One could just bring in CoverItLive, the software that makes live blogging an engaging online event, and let reporters either choose to be the stenographers or find a new occupation.

Surely no one really believes the downturn in news media as we once knew them will get this far. However, it is plausible that, as the CiL Web site claims, “live blogging is going to be a critical piece of web based reporting in the future” and CiL may very well be one of the best tools in this effort.

The thing about tools is that they can shape how individuals view their work. Abraham Maslow said in 1962, “When the only tool you have is a hammer, it is tempting to treat everything as if it were a nail.” Such over-reliance on familiar tools is frequently called the law of the instrument or even Maslow’s hammer.

This point is of primary relevance to anyone learning or considering the effects of new media tools on journalism practices. There is a human tendency to subordinate social activity to technology, as if innovation is always brought about by some sacred, authoritative design, giving society no say in the matter. A common example is building highways, which forces citizens to drive cars, to commute, to live miles from the grocery store, school, family, etc.

Now we have the information superhighway called the Internet. Without detracting from the communication marvel that it is, one must wonder how cognizant journalists are of the way news is adapted to the Internet. Attempts range from mimicking patterns of old mediums (see this Newsweek must read that talks about the iTablet and more journo musings) to abandoning story-telling for social networking media. Without a framework to inform evaluations of purposeful tools, we just keep hammering at every new method as if it were a nail.

For what are the nail and the hammer metaphors? I don’t know. Perhaps commercial interests and advertisements. Perhaps infotainment and celebrity news. Perhaps Nielsen ratings and gimmicky quasi-news. It is not always best to define symbols concretely.

This goes back to my post on the purpose of media.

How, then, does one evaluate the purpose of liveblogging and media tools such as CoveritLive? How could news makers know without first assessing the needs of the community by consulting with members? The Anniston Star in Alabama provides a wonderful example in hosting a live Q&A with the mayor.

It doesn’t take genius to figure out what a community needs to better its environment, but asking is even simpler than surmising. Still better yet, the Anniston Star shows that the media can just let the towns people ask and simply listen and watch. Now… what happens next?

Demo-CoveritLive

Filed under: New media technology