The AP has released some info on its new “protection” system–not sure what exactly they are trying to protect us from.

From CrunchGear:

This same system, as you recall, has prevented the rise of piracy in the music and movie arenas and must be applied to the written word before the Internet fails and we all resort to getting our news from “prophets” who will line major thoroughfares opining on things they believe happened, whether or not they are true. In short, we’ll be stuck with cable news pundits.

Even funnier is the graphic that leads the post. If you’re easily offended by curse words you may want to skip it.

However, if you are offended by the AP’s attitude towards bloggers and everyone who isn’t the AP, it’s a must read.

Trace isn’t going to mention it here, but something happened over the last couple of days that we’d be silly not to recognize. She broke a national story over at her own blog, Newscoma.

The details of the story, the discussion over the issues, etc.–we’ll leave that over to her blog where it belongs. In fact, there are already over one hundred comments on her post along with several trackbacks from other bloggers who have linked to it, so there’s no need in rehashing any of that here.

What I think we should recognize here is that Trace is actually out there doing all of the things that we talk about here. She’s walking the walk. Without working for a newspaper, she broke a story (a big one) on her very own site. And other people are doing this every day too.

Have there been some instances of big media outlets stealing her thunder a little bit? Sure there have. That was pointed out yesterday as well. But there has also been recognition for her by some bigger media outlets too. And this is just one story. What if she breaks another one in the next week or month?

Just one person.

It can be done! Trace is doing it! It’s great to see! And on a personal note, I’m very proud of her for pulling it off! I’m sure there are plenty of papers in her area who would love to have broken a story like that!

image credit

Michael Silence gives mainstream media a tongue lashing.

If you have never read Stephen King’s “On Writing” you should because not only does it talk about technique but it also talks about the passion and the joy of writing.

How To Make My Blog breaks down how this book can also help you with blogging.

My favorite is this one:

Do it for joy. If there is no joy in it, it’s just no good. Writing is not about making money, getting famous, or making friends. Writing blog posts should be inspired play and it should not feel like work. When you do it for joy, you can do it forever, no matter what.

Blog for the joy of it. The rest is gravy.

Read the whole list. It really is fabulous.

Also Doug

Google guru Matt Cutts has posted a letter he wrote to a young journalist friend back in 2007.

It seems like most of the advice still applies, although there’s admittedly more of a sense of urgency now than there was then.

I don’t expect that sense of urgency to be waning any time soon.

So the first thing I’d recommend is to grab a domain name and work on burnishing your personal reputation online. It’s definitely not the case that everyone needs a blog, but having one place that acts as a face to the world can really help. There’s room for a resume/CV, but also for some writing samples that show off your abilities.

Sounds familiar, huh?

A comprehensive breakdown from Nathan at Compassion in Politics on social media in a university setting.

From HR to marketing to networking, social media is revolutionizing how we communicate with each other. Whether you represent your universities marketing department or perhaps a law school or business school department, its imperative that you start engaging strategically in social media. For instance the New Society for Communication Research highlights recent research by a research fellow and professor of marketing from the University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth:

Go read what he dug up. It’s very well done.

From TechCrunch, commenting on a study from The Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism:

Online journalists are cautiously optimistic that their publications have viable business models compared to traditional forms of media. Over 60 percent of respondents reported that their online news units were making a profit. But only four out of every ten online journalists are “very confident” that online news can find a profitable business model for journalism, and are worried about the money-making prospects of internet advertising.

Here’s the thing…

We all know the demand for news and journalism is there. But I sometimes wonder if the answer is for those who are demanding it to lose it before they truly understand its value. Maybe it’s one of those “don’t know what you got ’til it’s gone” situations?

On one hand, I hope not. It would be a shame to lose what’s been built. On the other hand, a truly fresh approach isn’t always a bad thing either.

This just might be brilliant.

Great post today at DBT on using your blog as a job search tool.

I think it’s appropriate for journalists to consider one other thing here…

Just having a blog proves you are familiar and have experience with technology and new media, which is where it would appear journalism is moving.

Rapidly.

By Trace Sharp

The issue of anonymous commenters on news web sites has hit the courtroom in Knoxville. The issue has brought up a lot of discussion on and off line about the right to remain anonymous.

Katie Allison Granju and I agree on this subject.

The online comments on media web sites – including the anonymous ones –  are simply another form of public conversation. They are no different from the conversations taking place each day at the local diner, and on talk radio, and between street preachers and the passersby who engage in loud, public arguments with them. The only difference is that in this case, the defense attorneys for these notorious suspects happen to have heard the conversation taking place in two particular online spaces. However, if the attorneys don’t understand that the same sorts of public conversations regarding them and their clients are also taking place in all kinds of other physical and virtual locations – from church pulpits to Twitter to online message boards unaffiliated with a newspaper or TV station – then they are simply deluding themselves.

I have a right to express myself publicly – in writing or verbally – unless I step into one of the very narrow legal limitations on free speech (libel, slander, conspiracy to commit a crime, etc). And I have no obligation to identify myself before speaking up. Where I say what I have to say is not a factor in whether I get to say it. I can loudly bloviate about it while sitting at the bar at my favorite pub. I can publish my views on the case on my anonymous blog. I can post it under my “handle” on Twitter or a local message board. I can call Rush Limbaugh and say it over the airwaves, or I can write it on a banner and hang it on the front of my house. I can also post it in the comments on my local newspaper website. The platform is not a factor in whether what I say is constitutionally protected or not.

She’s right. Love or hate what someone is saying, they have the right to say what they want to say.

A deeper element to this issue, of course, is now the court system is getting involved in online communities and how this will play out. The case in point is connected to a terrible murder in 2007. The defense attorney are arguing that their client won’t have a fair trial as he has already been demonized in comments.

I call foul on this one but the case is not surprising that the judicial system has been asked to get involved. This is what defense attorneys do, plain and simple.

Let’s head to the First Amendment Center to see what the Supreme Court has to say about anonymous comments.

Unmasking anonymous bloggers
The Supreme Court has made clear that anonymous speech deserves First Amendment protection. In Talley v. California, the Court wrote: “Anonymous pamphlets, leaflets, brochures and even books have played an important role in the progress of mankind.” Several Founding Fathers published historic political articles anonymously. James Madison, John Jay and Alexander Hamilton wrote the 85 essays in The Federalist Papers under the pen name “Publius.”

Individuals who post messages anonymously, criticizing companies, bosses, public officials and others, often make valid criticisms. Other times their speech could contain damaging false statements of fact that cross the line into defamation. Online libel remains a risk for those who blog, as it does for any writer or reporter in any medium.

The question becomes, how does the legal system protect the First Amendment-based right to anonymous speech while still affording a remedy to individuals whose reputations have been trashed unfairly online?

This story isn’t going to go away. Blogging and online news is still relatively new and at times misunderstood. I do believe that anonymous commenters serve a purpose in escalating the conversation.

I may not always like what they have to say, but I will defend their right to say it. If anyone is online at this period of time, they really need to be following what is going on regarding their rights in the judicial process because it just might effect all of us in the long term.

As Michael Silence noted: This is a defense attorney’s ploy. Let’s hope it doesn’t blow up in the face of free speech.