Another Reporter Down: Blog-Frigging-Tastic (rant)

If you haven’t caught it yet, Shea Allen, a reporter, has been fired.

While, sure, reporters get fired, Allen is added to the group who have been fired from posting on their personal blogs. Which, in turn, adds to the argumentative flame of where we draw the line between work writing and personal writing (and sharing).

Shouldn’t journalists be able to live a double life? One professional and one personal? If not, then why is it okay to have a fully professional life, but not a fully personal one in the world of reporting?

My response is this.

If anyone deeply cared, flat-out hated what she had to say on her personal blog, refusing to watch her professional reporting, are those people a news network really wants to have as part of their audience?

I sure don’t.

By the way, I eat almonds at work, I feel uncomfortable around disabled people, and I’ve had to do an interview without underwear because all of mine were dirty.

So what. Fire me.

The Filter Bubble

Barely eight months ago, I was on Facebook wanting to connect with an old friend that I was already a friend with on Facebook. I never saw her status updates, or profile picture changes on my news feed. I searched for her, wrote on her wall and then left. Later that day when I checked Facebook again, I saw her latest status update in my feed. Coincidence, I thought. Until I noticed it would happen every time that I would reach out to an old friend.

This is the Filter Bubble at it’s finest, but, also its worst. While I was seeing more content that I wanted to see the majority of the time, I was never  seeing the content that I want to see some of the time. The Filter Bubble is a way to describe websites efforts to analyze the signals you give off when on the web so that they can give you more of what you are (or may be) interested in and less (or in my case, none) of what you don’t want.

I bought a new pair of shoes roughly four months ago. Naturally, before my purchase, I visited a handful of websites, Zappos being one of the more prominent ones. After bookmarking a few pages to return to later, I carried on with the rest of my work. However, though I wasn’t focused on shoes anymore, I saw ads for the pairs of shoes I was interested in and other ones similar to them at every page I went to. Pandora, NYT, blogs – anywhere I went, the shoes followed. I was infiltrated and while I would like to think that I bought the shoes that showed most commonly on the ads because I simply liked them and cut the other options, I’m not so sure I can say that.

These two examples make me feel victimized by “behavioral retargeting” – persistent personalized advertising. Outside of the simply profound marketing tactic, the efforts to personalize everything you see on the web carries many significant problems.  Two in particular truly stick out to me.

Objectivity

A serious problem is that we are becoming less and less objective. And to think, it used to be a goal of journalists to be objective. Now, “for and against” articles have become harder to write because we are never exposed to views that oppose our actions. Nicholas Negroponte puts it perfectly, “on one end of the spectrum is sycophantic personalization – ‘you’re so great and wonderful, and I’m going to tell you exactly what you want to hear.’ On the other end is the parental approach: ‘I’m going to tell you this whether you want to hear this or not, because you need to know.” While the efforts to produce both content are there, the market is not. And that’s a serious problem.

Creativity

Pariser notes that “by definition, ingenuity comes form the juxtaposition of ideas that are far apart.” I agree with every note of Pariser’s that the Filter Bubble is crumbling creativity. Often times, the most creative content is produced in opposition to someone else’s idea, but if an artist never sees an opposing idea, the creative process is much more difficult to kick start. In essence, while the Filter Bubble can connect you with ideas to build on in a creative sense, it prevents you from reaching your fullest creative potential.

 

Personally

Do I believe that I live in a Filter Bubble? Yes, I have to. However, the real question lies in whether the Filter Bubble still exists if you are aware of it, observe the changes, stretch for objectivity in opposition to the specialization efforts of the web, and overall, attempt to control your Filter Bubble. It seems to me that Pariser says the Filter Bubble owns us, whereas, I would argue that. The world (and web!) may change, but we always have the power to leverage whatever it is we are faced with.

Rolling Stone, Thank You

o-ROLLING-STONE-TSARNAEV-570

I have only one comment to make about this cover, and it’s a comment I know you won’t read anywhere else.

Some people, somewhere around the world, are seeing this magazine and they have no clue who the person on this cover is. Is he a rock star? Is he a successful college drop out? I mean, when I hear people talk about music, I still catch them saying “their new album is the bomb!”

Alas, they discover the harsh truth of who is on the cover.

Today, I don’t think of all those arguing over the decision to put Tsarnaev on the cover should be embossed. Today I think we should examine how information spreads and news reaches previously deaf ears and blind eyes.

For giving us the chance to do that, Rolling Stone, thank you.

A New Point Of View

“This reporter’s point of view was now data for my own work on our shifting cultural expectations and technology.”  –  Sherry Turkle

Reporting doesn’t need to be done first hand. In fact, a lot of great reporting has been done by using reports from dozens of other reporters.

It’s information alchemy in my mind.

Lies, Damned Lies and the Internet

We may as well give up the attempt to know anything about the fate and fortunes of our armies in any quarter whatever; and all in consequence of the infernal invention of the Internet. It is one of the worst plagues and curses that have ever befallen this human race. It covers us all over with lies, fills the very air we breathe and obscures the very sun; makes us doubt of everything we read, because we know that the chances are ten to one it is false; and leaves us uncertain, at last of our own existence. Men say it brings intelligence quick; yet every event announced by it is always so obfuscated by these quick-coming reports, all destroying one another, that the true story is generally longer in being ascertained than it was before.

On July 10, the editors of The Richmond Enquirer summarized their experience using the electronic telegraph. It just so happens the above paragraph is exactly how they summarized it other than the single use of the word “Internet.” Simply exchange “Internet” with “electronic telegraph” and there you have it.

Don’t mind me. Just putting technology in perspective.

source