Aggregators

I just am not a huge fan of aggregators. Instead of taking an article, forming one’s own ideas, and writing about them, it’s much easier to link up to something. I feel like in a way this is cheapening journalism. I think links are fine to use as long as they supplement an article for reference or further reading. I do not like the fact that aggregators simply compile lists of links. I feel as though aggregators are shallow and not very reliable. They definitely promote “a kind of snapshot-thinking”. They aren’t useful ways of learning about a topic.
Drill down tools, on the other hand, are almost the exact opposites of aggregators. Their goal is to delve deeper into the subject you’re researching, and to give you useful information. Aggregators are helpful if you’re looking for basic, recent information, but if you’re looking for anything beyond that they really aren’t too helpful. Drill down tools, however, are able to find the more obscure articles that you may be looking for.
I looked through some of the drill down tools, and my favorite was the Librarian’s Internet Index. It caught my eye because it seemed reliable, and I soon found out that it was a “search engine listing sites deemed trustworthy by actual human librarians not just a Googlebot”. Humans, unlike computers, are able to pick out which articles are useful, and a site that employs the help of credible people is more likely to yield better search results than one dictated by a robot.

2014 Video

In the future I see the replacement of newspapers to be credible online new sites and blogs. There might still be some remaining all online newspapers that will be read as well. I feel as though I will probably conform to the times and begin reading news blogs for my information. I may even contribute a little citizen journalism. I’m not sure that it’s going to be quite as drastic as the 2014 video makes the future sound. It’s possible that the world will some day be completely run on citizen journalism, but I think that there will still be many credible news sites, even if newspapers have folded.

Twitter in Digital Marketing

This video is pretty interesting. It explains how twitter can be used by companies to crowd source, release new commercials, and how twitter overall can change digital marketing.

Facebook and Twitter

No need to choose between the two! This connects your twitter to your facebook, allowing you to save time and effort posting on two sites.

Why We Love Twitter

Twitter really alive for one reason only which is to follow celebrities. Twitter is popular enough that one of your friends might have an account, but it’s not at the point that it’s really going to be worth writing anything. Not that many people are probably following you. I think facebook is always going to have an edge over twitter in the respect that you can do so much more than just post your status. Many people are going to choose to spend their time on facebook rather than twitter.

The only thing that really brings people to twitter is the accessibility of celebrities. Our society is obsessed with celebrities, and following them on twitter is just one more way to see into their lives. What makes celebrities so much more accessible on twitter rather than facebook is that you don’t have to friend someone on twitter, you can simply begin following them. Is it necessary that I know that Shaq is eating a sandwich right now? Not really, but in the celebrity obsessed time that we live in many people actually do want to know this kind of thing.

Site Content

These hyperlocal sites usually have an extremely small staff which makes it difficult to cover anything more than localized news, or to have a real jazzed up site, but there are some easy ways to make the site more interactive and informative.

To brainstorm ideas for site content I went to different sites and thought “what would make me want to keep coming back to this site?” I got a couple ideas here and there from different sites, and I’ve compiled a list of ways in which a localized news site can improve the quality of their site.

One idea is to have a face to the page. If we’re working with a site that’s dedicated to Connecticut politics, you want to have a person that people will look to to know everything that’s going on in the capital. Videos of this person talking about the issues will really help the site. If let’s say this person does a weekly or so video then people who go to the site will be accustomed to hearing them, and but trust in them. This person is going to have to be knowledgeable, helpful, informed, and take a neutral stance. When someone wants to know about an issue and have it described to them in simple terms they should look to the face of the site for that.

Another idea would be to have small sections of the site that are engaging and fun. Some of these ideas include daily polls and political cartoons.

Making the site more interactive would help to attract the reader’s attention. One way we could do that would be to have weekly polls asking questions. Another way could be having a segment where readers can ask questions they might have on the issues. Some of these questions could then be answered on the site.

Having a small staff means that the site is going to have to be very resourceful and going to have to maximize the possibilities for their content. Citizen journalism would be a great way to do this. To encourage good citizen journalism they could have a contest with prizes for the best articles.

Hyperlocal News

I think hyperlocal news is an exciting new direction that journalism could go in. I think it’s especially great for small towns, and it’s an informative and interesting new supplement to the national news. There are many good sides to this type of journalism, but there are also some issues that need addressing.

One of these issues is the lack of technical resources in these sites. If you look at them you will be able to notice that they aren’t exactly the most aesthetically pleasing to the eyes. This is because of the sites lack of resources. After all, it is meant to be a news source, so many of the people working on the site are journalists without much idea as to how a website layout should be formed. Many people may be turned off by the look of the site, and not bother to read its content. Another problem with local journalism is the small audience. There really might not be that many people in a small county who care enough to read national news, never mind local news. It’s also difficult to get the word out there about these sites. They don’t have much money to advertise, so they have to gain exposure mainly by word of mouth. These sites also have a lack of competition. They don’t cover national news stories, so it’s not as though they are competing with large news sources, and the odds are very slim that another small site is going to cover the same news stories as them. Competition is a main component in the media. It motivates journalists to do their best work in a timely fashion. Writers for a small hyperlocal site may not have the same drive to produce top notch work. Another problem with small, localized websites is their bias. Alysaa mentions this in one of her latest posts. If many people in one town are of a certain race, religion, political view, or what have you, then the paper is going to have a bias leaning towards their views. This is not necessarily a bad thing, because the readers are going to read the site more if they can agree with what it’s saying, but it may not hold the site to a high journalistic standard.

A major problem with hyperlocal journalism is finding companies who are willing to advertise on these sites. Without a large financial backing or advertisers, it is nearly impossible for these small site to survive. Unfortunately, some large companies with some extra money are willing to invest in these sites hoping that they will be able to turn a quick profit. The possibilities to make a large profit are definitely there, but the site needs to be cared for, and not seen as simply a tiny project to get money for a larger paper or company. As The Washington Post found out, theses sites have to be a main priority, and not just a side venture. The Post had to close down their site LoundounExtra.com, which was a hyperlocal news site covering Loundoun County, VA. The Post found that the site was expensive and tough to update “the large amount of special features and technologies”. Analyst Greg Sterling stated that “the model works only if a bunch of sales people pound the pavement, or if a company like AOL with a network of large advertisers offers them geo-targeted ads as part of a bigger package”. In other words, the Post didn’t want to put in the effort needed to make the site work.

As well as the cons, there are many pros to hyperlocalized journalism. Journalists are going to care more about what is happening in their own backyard than what is happening in a different country. They’re probably going to be pretty knowledgeable about their own town and it’s happenings. These journalists are also going to be invested in their work. They most likely will either be young journalists, or out of work journalists trying to find work. They obviously care about their work if they’re willing to write for such a small medium. These journalists aren’t able to grab a story off the AP wire and run with it. They must do much more legwork to find truly interesting and unique stories about their own community.

When these sites are given a certain amount of attention they can become successful, as seen with CTNewsJunkie.com. Christine Stewart, the editor and reporter for the site, said that it was challenging to get the site off the ground and running. She has managed to make the site successful by hiring unpaid interns, not paying herself, and paying out of her own pocket to back the site. People like Stewart are the reason why some smaller sites are able to thrive.

Election Day

So, we’re supposed to talk about our experience on Election Day. I haven’t written anything on the topic as of yet because well…I didn’t exactly vote. Yes, I know, I know. Every vote truly does count, as was proven by the election in my town that was decided by one, single vote.

But what if I was that deciding vote? Would it have been fair if I had voted knowing virtually nothing about the candidates beside their political party? Was my choice not to vote actually the more mature decision rather than voting just to say I voted? I think so.

I think it’s somewhat irresponsible to vote without knowing at least where each candidate stands on a few key issues. I know every legal citizen aged 18 or older has the right to vote, but people can use that right incorrectly by simply voting for whomever.

Some people might think I was just being lazy or apathetic by not voting, but really I was making a statement. If you’re not properly informed and you vote, then you’re being more careless than I am.

Wikipedia

For my Wikipedia experiment I decided to edit my high school’s page. I made a few adjustments such as adding the school mascot and such. I looked back on the page a few days later and my terms had been deleted! That made me wonder who exactly is editing these pages? It couldn’t have actually been anyone associated with the school because why would they erase the name of the school mascot? It’s not like I was throwing around incorrect facts for anything.

At this point I was a little annoyed at Wikipedia. Who on Wikipedia is possibly a bigger expert on my high school than someone who went there for four years? So, I looked into the history to track down the rude person who deleted my completely relevant and correct edit. That’s when I came across this page. Hu12. Now, without actually looking at the page I had somewhat of a hatred for Hu12 who thought he or she was like king of Wikipedia by deleting stuff that they probably had absolutely no idea about. My hatred grew as I scanned their page.

They were officially an “administrator”. Wikipedia states that their administrators are “elected by the community and have access to a few more tools. They can delete articles, can block accounts or IP addresses, and can edit fully protected articles”.

So, this Hu12 obviously thought he or she was awesome because they had been given an administrator position on Wikipedia. Congrats, Hu12. You must be so proud.

Hu12 had been given 12 Barnstars and Awards such as “The Spamstar of Glory presented to Hu12 for ferocity in fighting spam on Wikipedia”. Hu12 is also a member of WikiProject Spam and a member of the Counter-Vandalism Unit. So, it’s quite obvious that this person does not have a life, and spends their time fighting the brave war versus spam on Wikipedia. This person probably goes around deleting everything thinking it’s spam and hoping to get more of those prestigious Barnstars and Awards.

How does any administrator know what is spam and what is not? It’s obvious that Hu12 didn’t know the difference. So, not only do many of the people writing on Wikipedia not know what they’re doing, but apparently the administrators don’t know either.

Let Me Edit A-Rod’s Page!

Wikipedia! How dare you! I thought I was able to edit anything I wanted. My feelings are actually somewhat hurt. I was watching the Yankees game, and had a question about Alex Rodriguez, so naturally, I Wikipediaed him. To my dismay, I noticed that I was not able to edit his page. I went around searching other player’s pages, and the only other people who I couldn’t edit were Manny Ramirez and Barry Bonds. I’m sure Wikipedia has done this because there are so many negative comments written about these people. But what if I was an A-rod expert? So there apparently are some restrictions to what can and can’t be edited.