| |||
| |||
|
Sabtu, 29 September 2012
journalism - Google News: Polisi Tangkap Tiga Pelajar di Pancoran Mas - Liputan6.com
journalism - Google News: Fitra Ramadhan Diperiksa Polisi - Liputan6.com
| |||
| |||
|
journalism - Google News: Polri Perbaiki Rumah Warga Pascaledakan Bom di Solo - Liputan6.com
| |||
| |||
|
journalism - Google News: Nelayan Manokwari Protes Kejaksaan Negeri - Liputan6.com
| |||
| |||
|
Jumat, 28 September 2012
journalism - Google News: Unhas Gelar Workshop Jurnalisme Warga - Okezone
| |||
| |||
|
journalism - Google News: SCTV Gelar Panggung Spektakuler InBox Awards 2012 - Liputan6.com
| |||
| |||
|
journalism - Google News: Pencarian Korban KMP Bahuga Jaya Dilanjutkan - Liputan6.com
| |||
| |||
|
journalism - Google News: Irjen Djoko Susilo Tolak Panggilan KPK - Liputan6.com
| |||
| |||
|
Nieman Journalism Lab
Nieman Journalism Lab |
- Dan Gillmor: Journalism school should provide an excellent liberal arts education
- The newsonomics of Pricing 201
- Free the Files! ProPublica taps the crowd for a database-building sprint to election day
| Dan Gillmor: Journalism school should provide an excellent liberal arts education Posted: 27 Sep 2012 09:00 AM PDT Editor’s Note: It’s the start of the school year, which means students are returning to journalism programs around the country. As the media industry continues to evolve, how well is new talent being trained, and how well are schools preparing them for the real world? We asked an array of people — hiring editors, recent graduates, professors, technologists, deans — to evaluate the job j-schools are doing and to offer ideas for how they might improve. Here Dan Gillmor — ex-newspaper reporter, media thinker, Arizona State professor of digital media entrepreneurship — lays out his ideas for making journalism education more useful and relevant. Accepting an award from Arizona State University’s Walter Cronkite School for Journalism & Mass Communication in 2008, former PBS NewsHour host Robert McNeil called journalism education probably “the best general education that an American citizen can get” today. Perhaps he was playing to his audience, at least to a degree. Many other kinds of undergraduate degree programs could lay claim to a similar value; a strong liberal arts degree, no matter what the major, has great merit. Still, there’s no doubt that a journalism degree, done right, is an excellent foundation for a student’s future in any field, not just media. Even if McNeil overstated the case, his words should inspire journalism educators to ponder their role in a world where these programs’ traditional reason for being is increasingly murky. Our raison d’être is open to question largely because the employment pipeline of the past, a progression leading from school to jobs in media and related industries, is (at best) in jeopardy. We’re still turning out young graduates who go off to work in entry-level jobs, particularly in broadcasting — but where is their career path from there? If traditional media have adapted fitfully to the collision of technology and media, journalism schools as a group may have been even slower to react to the huge shifts in the craft and its business practices. Only recently have they embraced digital technologies in their work with students who plan to enter traditional media. Too few are helping students understand that they may well have to invent their own jobs, much less helping them do so. Yet journalism education could and should have a long and even prosperous life ahead — if its practitioners make some fundamental shifts, recognizing the realities of the 21st century. If I ran a journalism school, I would start with the same basic principles of honorable, high-quality journalism and mediactivism, and embed them at the core of everything else. If our students didn’t understand and appreciate them, nothing else we did would matter very much. With the principles as the foundation, we would, among many other things:
All this suggests a considerably broader mission for journalism schools and programs than the one they’ve had in the past. It also suggests a huge opportunity for journalism schools. The need for this kind of training has never been greater. We’re not the only ones who can do it, but we may be among the best equipped. This piece was adapted from Dan’s book Mediactive.  |
| The newsonomics of Pricing 201 Posted: 27 Sep 2012 08:35 AM PDT Don’t call it a price increase. Call it a re-valuation of the customer proposition. Really. Now, waist-deep into the digital circulation revenue revolution, we’re adding fact to hunch, data to intuition. Take The Post and Courier of Charleston, S.C., and its spring paywall launch. The 85,000-circulation daily benefited by being a fast follower, learning from early paywall adopters, when it launched on May 1. The big result so far: a run rate that will produce a 10 percent annual circulation revenue increase. That’s serious money, especially as advertising dollars wend farther south. Further, it’s an indication that a key brick in the foundation of the new news business model is being laid. I’ve pointed to the quick ascendance of reader revenue (“The newsonomics of majority reader revenue”) and that trend is gaining steam as we push into 2013. In fact, if you look at Charleston’s own trajectory, it now generates 37 percent of its revenue from circulation, up dramatically from 15.7 percent in 2000. (For those long in the business, we can call this Revenge of the Circulation VPs). Circulation has turned from a means (getting ad-rich papers to shoppers) to an end unto itself, actually getting readers to pay a significant share of the journalism costs. It’s a simple proposition: You ask the people who really value you and your journalism to pay you more. Surprisingly to some, it looks like many of us are willing to. Why didn’t we think of this earlier, before the carnage of cuts overwhelmed the profession? Call it a brew of misunderstanding the digital transition, of timidity, of Steve Jobs’ iRevolutions…and of desperation. As Disraeli put it, “Desperation is sometimes as powerful an inspirer as genius.” In Charleston, Steve Wagenlander’s inspirations were the multiple experiments he saw going on around the country and more widely. Wagenlander is in charge of audience development at The Post and Courier. Which leads us back to that re-valuation of the customer proposition. Wagenlander says The Post and Courier is “playing off the American Express line of 20 years ago: Membership has its benefits.” “Why should I spend $20 a month on the paper?” was the deep question Wagenlander and his colleagues asked themselves. The answer both takes papers both back to their community roots and propels them forward into this digital age. The Post and Courier decided that it wouldn’t make a point of charging its 60,000 subscribers extra fees for digital access, as some papers are now doing. They focused on “the bundle.” That bundle is a promise, a growing bag of goodies that quickly moves users to readers to subscribers and now to members. That membership notion — also being tested at The Boston Globe, the Los Angeles Times, and The Day in New London, Conn. — restates both the consumer value proposition and backs it up with a vow to take care of its customers’ reading and shopping needs in ever-expanding ways. The Post and Courier’s Daily Advantage membership program offers a baseline of benefits:
That’s a good beginning bundle, and Wagenlander says it will build on. The results of the new value proposition so far are noteworthy:
Overall, we can figure the paper should be en route for $2 million or so of increased annual revenue. Building on The Post and Courier’s example, let’s flesh out what we’re learning about paywall strategies. I’ll call it The Newsonomics of Pricing 102, following up on my spring Pricing 101 post. With digital circulation becoming mainstream worldwide (“The newsonomics of paywalls all over the world”) from Finland to Spain to Australia to Japan to North America, we should now see “paywalls” as vital strategy, not experiment. In fact, digital circulation provides a talisman of certainty — as certain as things get these days — in a world of flux. Quite simply, established newspaper readers are voting with their wallets. They like their local news papers and sites. If those companies offer a trusted hand, transitioning and toggling into the tablet/smartphone/Roku-assisted world along with the readers, the great majority of those readers are willing to shake on it. Price isn’t a big deal. We’ve learned that trusted news access has been long undervalued, and we’re now testing not pricing floors, but pricing ceilings. How much is too much? How much forces too many readers to stop paying? That’s a good problem to have. Certainly, we’ll see ceilings bumped soon, as publishers further price up, but this year and next, there’s new money to be had. A few further lessons, culled from lots of executional wisdom now being shared:
Look at this in the bigger picture. Ad revenue is in decline and circulation revenue among those who put in paywalls and do it right — a small number of “free” articles, added membership value, sufficient editorial quality, an optimized mobile experience — is up. It’s less a question, of course, of when reader revenue surpasses ad revenue. The question, can reader revenues — plus other newer initiatives — make up for ad losses and lead newspaper companies, shriveled as they are, back to a path of modest growth? As publishers budget for 2013, no one can answer with a strong affirmative “Yes!” But that potential is now surfacing. Photo by Jessica Wilson used under a Creative Commons license.  |
| Free the Files! ProPublica taps the crowd for a database-building sprint to election day Posted: 27 Sep 2012 08:00 AM PDT Political transparency geeks got both good news and bad news from the Federal Communications Commission last April. Good news first: The FCC decided it would require television stations to put information about political ad buys online. The bad news: Only stations from the top 50 markets are required to do so, and stations can post the files as image PDFs — meaning there’s no easy way to search records by the name of the ad buyer from the FCC database. And what good is a bunch of data if you can’t extract meaning?
ProPublica is coming to the rescue — it hopes, with your help — with a project launched today called Free the Files, the latest iteration of an ongoing effort to examine political ads and the shadowy groups that often pay for them. Within the top 50 TV markets, ProPublica is focusing on ads purchased in swing states like Virginia, Florida, Nevada, and Pennsylvania. Your mission, should you choose to accept it:
There are plenty of group names already in the system, so when you start typing “American…” for example, a list of nonprofits or super PACs like American Crossroads pops up. It’s a feature that promotes consistency in data entry in the same way that including a contract number is meant to eliminate duplications. Help buttons attached to each question guide volunteers on properly reading the files. There’s also a box to check if you notice “something else notable” about any given file. “The beauty of this is its simplicity,” ProPublica senior engagement editor Amanda Zamora told me. “We’re asking for very specific data points. We’re not asking people to do that next step and say, ‘What kind of group is this?’ We chose to focus, to make it something that people would likely do. We want to give people incentive but also don’t want them to feel, ‘This is a Sisyphean task, we’ll never make it.’”
“The whole thing is a huge experiment, and we’re not sure if it’s going to work,” Shaw told me. “It’s a news app that our readers are essentially building in real time. One thing we’re worried about: Are we going to have an empty room, just a super structure with no data?” ProPublica’s also in the thick of another real-time crowdsourced database project this election season. The site has been asking readers to feed its Message Machine with campaign emails — readers also provide demographic information about themselves to ProPublica — in hopes of better understanding how campaigns target different groups. (That layer of analysis comes later. The real-time component is the ability to mouse over a graph of emails, sorted by candidate and subject line.) ProPublica isn’t measuring its success based on whether an army of volunteers can work their way through every last last file — although, of course, that’s an outcome the site would welcome. If this effort helps identify even one otherwise unknown ad buyer, that’s a journalistic victory in Zamora’s eyes. There’s also an opportunity to pick up where Federal Election Committee filings leave off — as well as identify so-called dark money groups that may be spending money on campaigns without reporting it to the FEC. ProPublica has its reporters ready to take the work of the crowd and apply traditional, aggressive reporting techniques. (Bonus: Other news organizations can dip into the database and do their own reporting.) The basic strategy: Crowdsource the assembly of a database but leave it to the reporters to take on more complicated and time-consuming legwork and analysis. Already ProPublica has a group of more than 500 volunteers — people who said they were willing to physically visit their local TV stations and send files to ProPublica before the FCC required the stations to do it. For volunteers, incentives are built in all around them. There’s the overarching idea that they’re contributing to important work, but they’ll also get to see the fruits of their labor as it happens. The Free the Files map that they’re populating with data will become more robust with their efforts. There’s also a gamification aspect to the project, which features a leaderboard that ranks volunteers by how many files they’ve freed. Plus, Zamora set up a Facebook group for the volunteers, a place where people can discuss their work, share information about ads they’ve seen in their home states, and so on. ProPublica has had success with crowdsourced projects in the past when they’ve assigned meaningful but doable tasks and created forums that reinforce the strength of the community that’s doing the work. Also, ProPublica frames the mission narrowly — that includes making clear not only the goal but explicitly telling volunteers what not to do. “We’re saying, ‘Look, this is not a place for political rants or partisanship,’” Zamora said. “We have a mission: We’re trying to increase transparency around political spending, and we’ve got a lot of documents and a lot of work to do in a short amount of time. We’re embarking on something really different, asking out readers to help us fill in the blanks, and visualize and log the data before it’s complete.”  |
But the task ahead is still a major one. ProPublica has more than 15,000 files on hand with 40 short days until the presidential election, and each datapoint on a file needs to be verified by at least two users before it can be officially entered into ProPublica’s database. Developing verification infrastructure has been the biggest challenge for ProPublica’s | You are subscribed to email updates from Nieman Journalism Lab To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
journalism - Google News: Melawan Poster Anti-Islam di New York - Republika Online
| |||
| |||
|
journalism - Google News: Melawan Poster Anti-Islam di Subway New York - Republika Online
| |||
| |||
|
Kamis, 27 September 2012
Nieman Journalism Lab
Nieman Journalism Lab |
- Sure, journalists need to know digital tools, but they really need to know how to do digital research
- New Pew study: Where you live helps shape your news diet
- New York Times, Washington Post developers team up to create Open Elections database
| Posted: 26 Sep 2012 09:15 AM PDT Editor’s Note: It’s the start of the school year, which means students are returning to journalism programs around the country. As the media industry continues to evolve, how well is new talent being trained, and how well are schools preparing them for the real world? We asked an array of people — hiring editors, recent graduates, professors, technologists, deans — to evaluate the job j-schools are doing and to offer ideas for how they might improve. Here’s John Wihbey, managing editor of the Shorenstein Center research portal Journalist’s Resource, argues that journalism schools need to do a better job of training journalists to research and go deeper into their subjects. Anyone who’s been to j-school remembers the initial jitters — and the bundle of nerves — that came with heading out on assignments and to beats unknown in those dizzying first months. Journalism schools have generally been good at steadying those nerves, giving students the confidence to explore new neighborhoods and challenging issues, and to ask tough questions. Throw in some sharpened writing skills and storytelling techniques, and we walked out with that traditional toolkit ready to go in the old media world. But in a wired age, where knowledge on all topics is accumulating and proliferating, a new kind of fear should be persistent for journalists: Not knowing what you're talking about. Or put more practically, not doing your research. There is little excuse these days for being uninformed and caught unaware. Expectations are being raised all around us.
Scholar-bloggers (and a legion of wonky twittizens) are now out in force. Statistics and data can be quickly located and brought to bear on most topics. Government agencies are creating research-oriented apps and APIs and uploading data sets fairly regularly. Unlike a decade ago — when much of the world's deepest knowledge sat on dusty library shelves — targeted search engines and databases such as Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic Search, PubMed, and the Social Science Research Network now make access to scholarship easy. One-fifth of all scholarship is "open access" (translation: no paywalls) and that trend is accelerating, according to the Peter Suber, director of Harvard’s Open Access Project. There's peril in not capitalizing on this flood of knowledge. Any smart group of readers will call you out on ignorance in the comment thread (or just deploy the #clueless hashtag) and then float away forever to other sites. At stake for journalists is this: having enough credibility with one's audience and being competent enough to convene readers/viewers who now have an overabundance of choices and alternatives. Otherwise, journalism loses its hard-won capacity to focus attention and define the contours of the public interest. In an overcrowded marketplace, it's ultimately about turning out the highest-value work on a given news topic. With the democratization of knowledge accelerating online, the bar is higher for young journalists. Outlets like The New York Times, The Atlantic, and others, with their suites of specialized blogs, are already reflecting as much. At the same time, the great anxiety for many journalism schools — and their central debate — is about how to merge traditional reporting skills with new tech tools and modes of delivery. Looming in the background is this issue of rising knowledge, even as schools struggle to figure out how to embed deeper research content into their classrooms. In our networked, crowdsourced media environment, the value of basic "reporting" on events and issues is diminished. Deep context and added-value knowledge around news, however, will remain scarce commodities. But how? The good news is that innovation, both in terms of tech tools and research capacity, can flourish in j-schools. Even at the 200- or 300-level of undergraduate courses, students can get accustomed to using academic sites such as Google Scholar, survey-oriented sites such as the Pew Research Center, and paid repositories like Academic Search Premier. JSTOR is another example. Reporting on vacant lots and redevelopment? You might want to know about this study. Exploring dynamics of overbearing parents in schools? This one might be useful. Backgrounding a piece on tax breaks for businesses? Take a look here. A new baseball stadium? Catch this. A smart search through key databases can yield a wealth of such information on deadline, which can then be leveraged for coverage of news events. Journalism educators should press students to mine such knowledge and be as aggressive in its pursuit online as they are of leads in the real world. This is not to suggest there is always some perfect study or dataset to inform every one-off local story. Establishing the habit is the thing. The same analytical skills embedded in the research review habit will make for better questions, more rigorous scrutiny of assumptions, higher-level journalism. Scholars perform a literature review as they approach questions; most topics have been studied for decades. Why neglect all of that accumulated knowledge? Even within difficult disciplines, journalists can obtain a reasonable fluency — enough to be well informed, know the deeper debates within issues, and ask more penetrating questions when engaging with experts (and avoid all of those blind phone calls for quotes). For journalism schools, this means not segregating "research skills" in a single seminar. It means every j-school instructor emphasizing sophisticated web search skills, some knowledge of statistical concepts, a familiarity with research databases, and fostering the strong desire for a non-anecdotal, contextual understanding of things. For the many brilliant career journalists who are now working in academia, this is not that heavy a lift. But it requires rebalancing. It's all a matter of reorienting j-school time and energy. And it means turning back toward the wealth of resources within universities — the experts in economics, sociology, political science, and many other departments — while teaching students to engage with those disciplines in a distinctively journalistic way. How many journalism classes have ever, for instance, read an original academic paper from a scholar on campus and then had a vigorous conversation with that scholar? (The News21 initiatives have pioneered some of this cross-disciplinary work.) Journalism education should move a little closer to the academic research world, using its resources to elevate and distinguish the reporting profession again in our new, more competitive information marketplace. Journalist's Resource — from Harvard Kennedy School's Shorenstein Center, where I work — is but one player in an emerging movement along these lines that comes out of the Carnegie-Knight Initiative on the Future of Journalism Education. We hope it grows. Across the nation's journalism schools, we're seeing huge steps in this direction already. All this comes at a crucial moment, when the profession's momentum can be recaptured. Imagine journalism that is as smart as the giant pool of available knowledge now online. Then imagine it brought to bear through new, more-personalized social streams and rendered through more engaging platforms and applications. If educators rise to the challenge of forging that future, journalism schools will have little to fear in the coming decades. Photo by David Michael Morris used under a Creative Commons license.  |
| New Pew study: Where you live helps shape your news diet Posted: 26 Sep 2012 09:10 AM PDT Residents of cities, suburbs, small towns, and rural areas have distinctly different news consumption habits, according to a study out today from the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism and Internet & American Life Project. Pew found that while those surveyed in different communities reported similarly high levels of interest about most of the same topics, their habits differ based on where they live.
Across the board, residents track local news more than other kinds of news. Weather is the most popular kind of news, followed by breaking news and politics. Most residents in large cities, small cities, and rural areas reported relying on word-of-mouth for news. Suburban residents are more interested in national news than are residents of cities, small towns, and rural areas. Other distinguishing factors come down to choice: People generally want similar kinds of news and information, but they don’t always have access to the same news resources. Large-city dwellers and suburban residents, for example, are more likely to have multiple devices like tablets and smartphones. Here’s a look at how news habits differed by community, according to Pew’s survey of 2,251 adults in January (including 750 calls to cell phones): City dwellers
Suburbanites
Small towns
Rural America
Photo by Dennis Yang used under a Creative Commons license.  |
| New York Times, Washington Post developers team up to create Open Elections database Posted: 26 Sep 2012 07:43 AM PDT Calling all data hounds! Senior developers from The New York Times and The Washington Post are looking for volunteers to help collect more than 10 years of federal elections data from each state. With their help — and $200,000 in Knight News Challenge funding — Serdar Tumgoren and Derek Willis are working on creating a free, comprehensive source of official U.S. election results. The goal is to end up with electoral data that can then be linked to different types of data sets — campaign finance, voter demographics, legislative histories, and so on — in ways that previously haven’t been possible on this scale. Tumgoren, of The Washington Post, says the idea for Open Elections came from “mutual frustration that there is no single, free source of data — and more importantly, nicely standardized data.” Soothing this frustration isn’t necessarily going to be pretty. The task of finding state elections data — at least some of which will be a godawful, inextricable mess — will require some “brute-forcing,” Tumgoren says. “If you look at Mississippi’s data, they make me not very happy — they make me sad, in fact,” Tumgoren said. “Just a sampling of a few states I randomly picked, they run the gambit from pretty good to oh-my-God-how-are-we-going-to-get-this-data.” Tumgoren estimates it will take about two years to get to where he wants Open Elections to be, but the entire process will be open to the public. As data comes in, the team will clean it up, put it in a standardized format, and share it. What that format will be is still up in the air — as are many of the details, which Tumgoren says they’ll have to figure out as they begin to get a better sense of the state of the data they’ll get. “There are going to be some states like Virginia that are wonderful and have very clean data,” Tumgoren said. “Other places — we don’t even know which ones yet — data is going to be less accessible because it’s not centralized or it’s in formats like image PDF.” For now, Open Elections is building the infrastructure to begin collecting and sorting data. As they recruit volunteers, they’ll be looking for people who can dig up U.S. Senate, House, presidential, and gubernatorial elections results from the past 10 years or so. “This is such a big project we’re limiting the scope initially,” Tumgoren said. “Governor, Senate, House, president: Whatever else we can get, we’re not going to turn our noses up at it.” While they may not be able to clean up, link, and standardize data from other races, Tumgoren says his team will still work to centralize it. “It’s just an untapped resource,” Tumgoren said. “The ability to do this is very limited right now. We almost don’t know what we don’t know. I have a vague sense of some of the questions I’d like to ask but I bet there are tons of journalists and developers who are going to think of things that never even occurred to me. The possibilities for so-called data mashups are limitless.” Photo by DonkeyHotey used under a Creative Commons license.  |
Some of the findings are intuitive — like how suburban residents, many of whom commute to work, are more likely than their urban counterparts to listen to the radio. Another example: Residents of large cities tend to be less interested in issues related to taxes, which could be because city-dwellers are likely to be younger and renters. Urban residents were also least likely to pay for a subscription to a local newspaper. Fewer than half of those surveyed in any type of community said they rely on a print newspaper.
| You are subscribed to email updates from Nieman Journalism Lab To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)