<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Future of journalism debate: editors required</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.speedcommunications.com/blogs/wadds/2009/06/23/future-of-journalism-debate-editors-required/feed/?12345" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.speedcommunications.com/blogs/wadds/2009/06/23/future-of-journalism-debate-editors-required/</link>
	<description>PR blog by Stephen Waddington</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 19:13:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill Hilton</title>
		<link>http://www.speedcommunications.com/blogs/wadds/2009/06/23/future-of-journalism-debate-editors-required/#comment-4791</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill Hilton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 15:10:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.speedcommunications.com/blogs/wadds/?p=1049#comment-4791</guid>
		<description>I was thinking this the other day. The Iran tweets, in particular, were really suffering from this - I contributed some myself until I started to realise that I was just adding to the noise.

A pair of possible solutions that I&#039;ve thought deeply about for, oooh, 15 seconds each. So feel free to pick holes - this is the bluest of blue skies stuff.

1. Power Tweeters (yeuuch) make it their business to diversify and define channels. So, for example, messages of sympathy and support could have gone to #supportiran rather than #iranelection. Clogging channels becomes a social media faux pas.

The problem with this is that people like to *feel involved*. That&#039;s the great draw of social media, but also, in this context, it&#039;s major weakness. The flame gets snuffed out by the beating of the wings of all the moths around it.

2. Trending topics are ranked using more sophisticated algorithm than simple volume. Could trending-topic tweets have a thumbs up/thumbs down icon, with the search results displaying some sort of balance between real-time and best-value (as decided by the crowd) tweets?

Solution one is crowdsourced, solution two is top-down tech-imposed. I think if social media - not just Twitter - are going to retain their value they need to remain flexible and crowd-based. In so far as possible, behaviours have to change as a result of crowd-developed standards and mores. Anything that takes freedom away from the user is going to dent the popularity and usefulness of any social medium that implements it.

Social media is still very young and I reckon we&#039;re very much in its adolescent phase (if we&#039;re even there yet). It&#039;s very shouty, and the group hasn&#039;t worked out the best way to deal with problematic behaviour. I&#039;m not sure a solution can be imposed - it might have to evolve.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was thinking this the other day. The Iran tweets, in particular, were really suffering from this &#8211; I contributed some myself until I started to realise that I was just adding to the noise.</p>
<p>A pair of possible solutions that I&#8217;ve thought deeply about for, oooh, 15 seconds each. So feel free to pick holes &#8211; this is the bluest of blue skies stuff.</p>
<p>1. Power Tweeters (yeuuch) make it their business to diversify and define channels. So, for example, messages of sympathy and support could have gone to #supportiran rather than #iranelection. Clogging channels becomes a social media faux pas.</p>
<p>The problem with this is that people like to *feel involved*. That&#8217;s the great draw of social media, but also, in this context, it&#8217;s major weakness. The flame gets snuffed out by the beating of the wings of all the moths around it.</p>
<p>2. Trending topics are ranked using more sophisticated algorithm than simple volume. Could trending-topic tweets have a thumbs up/thumbs down icon, with the search results displaying some sort of balance between real-time and best-value (as decided by the crowd) tweets?</p>
<p>Solution one is crowdsourced, solution two is top-down tech-imposed. I think if social media &#8211; not just Twitter &#8211; are going to retain their value they need to remain flexible and crowd-based. In so far as possible, behaviours have to change as a result of crowd-developed standards and mores. Anything that takes freedom away from the user is going to dent the popularity and usefulness of any social medium that implements it.</p>
<p>Social media is still very young and I reckon we&#8217;re very much in its adolescent phase (if we&#8217;re even there yet). It&#8217;s very shouty, and the group hasn&#8217;t worked out the best way to deal with problematic behaviour. I&#8217;m not sure a solution can be imposed &#8211; it might have to evolve.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Lee</title>
		<link>http://www.speedcommunications.com/blogs/wadds/2009/06/23/future-of-journalism-debate-editors-required/#comment-4790</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Lee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 08:06:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.speedcommunications.com/blogs/wadds/?p=1049#comment-4790</guid>
		<description>great point made. the fact of the matter is without trained journalists to provide both sides of the argument the only &#039;winners&#039; would be those who shout loudest and we regress as a result.

on Twitter I think the #unfollow option should be exercised with greater abandon so that serial offenders get the message...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>great point made. the fact of the matter is without trained journalists to provide both sides of the argument the only &#8216;winners&#8217; would be those who shout loudest and we regress as a result.</p>
<p>on Twitter I think the #unfollow option should be exercised with greater abandon so that serial offenders get the message&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: alan p</title>
		<link>http://www.speedcommunications.com/blogs/wadds/2009/06/23/future-of-journalism-debate-editors-required/#comment-4789</link>
		<dc:creator>alan p</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 08:03:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.speedcommunications.com/blogs/wadds/?p=1049#comment-4789</guid>
		<description>Wadds, as well as editorial (or Curation, as it is called in 2009 ;-) ) there will need for automated filtering to deal with the scale imho. 

Being able to spot changes of colour on avatars wouldn&#039;t hurt either ;-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wadds, as well as editorial (or Curation, as it is called in 2009 <img src='http://www.speedcommunications.com/blogs/wadds/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif?12345' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' />  ) there will need for automated filtering to deal with the scale imho. </p>
<p>Being able to spot changes of colour on avatars wouldn&#8217;t hurt either <img src='http://www.speedcommunications.com/blogs/wadds/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif?12345' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/


Served from: www.speedcommunications.com @ 2012-02-10 10:35:54 -->
