It’s been awhile since I’ve blogged about what I’m up to, journalistically speaking. But I’ve been keeping busy, and I’m very excited about the opportunities ahead and the stories I have yet to tell!

At KOMU, we’re trying to produce more in-depth stories, specifically about public policy issues and trends affecting the community. So each week I’ve been putting together an in-depth general assignment story for the following Monday’s 6:00 newscast, and so far it looks like it’s going to be a great endeavor! This past week, I’ve been working on a story about a bill in the Missouri legislature that would put into action “MOSIRA”- the Missouri Science and Innovation Reinvestment Act. It’s been an interesting story to work on. The most difficult part of putting these together, really, is trying to work in the time to drive back and forth to Jefferson City (which is really only 25 minutes away) to do interviews in the sporadic blocks of time I have outside of classes, and balancing them along with my Friday morning live shot shifts. I essentially head to the station at 1am on Friday nights, report live 4:30-7:00am, and then conduct interviews and get video throughout the days on Fridays, so I’ve been kind of a zombie on Friday afternoons/evenings… but it’s all definitely worth it.

One of the most exciting parts of the semester is a project I’m working on with Brian Pellot. We’re working with VeriCorder Technology to test, experiment with, and research effectiveness and solutions for their iPhone content editing softwares. And, as a part of that project, we’re headed to the 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympics to cover stories, train reporters on the software and survey them on how well it works for them, and do anything else we might be able to help out with for VeriCorder. I’m beyond excited! I have lots of family in Canada but haven’t been there in years, so I’m definitely excited to go to Vancouver… but even moreso, I’m in awe that I’ll get to check out the Olympics! It’s an amazing opportunity and I am so grateful to have the chance to go!

I’m not sure how much access I’ll have in terms of blogging while we’re in Vancouver, but I promise that I’ll update you on everything that happens while there. And I’ll do my best to provide links to content, if not the actual content, that I’m producing while there!

Anyway, I’m thrilled about the Olympics, and that’s really all I’m thinking about for the next few days. We’re headed out on the tenth and won’t get back ’til the twentieth, and after that we’ll be working on research for VeriCorder re: mobile technology. I’ll also be (finally) getting The Sparkler up and running as a podcast on iTunes, and beginning to figure out what I’m doing after graduation. Until then…I’m headed to Vancouver!

For my most recent Friday morning live shot shift, I interviewed a man who lifts hundreds of pounds worth of weight… with his teeth! Here’s a quick look.

You can also check out the Web story here!

Morning live shot from last Friday. I’m finally starting to get used to chilly mornings and how to get through them without my tongue freezing to the inside of my mouth… but as you can see in this clip, it’s a little rough at the end! In the next couple weeks I plan to work on making sure my voice stays consistent and that you can’t “hear the cold” in it. We’ll see how it goes!

You can choose to love her or you can choose to hate her, but you can’t choose to ignore her— at least not completely. And if you’re a journalist intent on finding the new effective business model, you better not try to shut her out. Gaga could be the guide to your success.

Check out this article on the Wall Street Journal’s Web site, and you’ll see what I mean. To sum it up, she has “made shrewd use of digital platforms,” not only by connecting with fans and listeners through social media but also through distributing her music. The article reads:
“Much of Gaga’s audience got her music for free, and legally. They have listened to free streams—by the hundreds of millions—on YouTube and the other online services that Gaga currently leads, according to research firm BigChampagne. On MySpace, Gaga has had 321.5 million plays. By contrast, singer Susan Boyle tallied only 133,000 plays, despite scoring the No. 2 selling album of 2009.”

She’s offering a free product, in this case- at least, a free base product. But by growing her fan base through providing free music, she spreads her personal brand (which, I think we can all agree, is pretty well-developed and distinct) and entices new fans to “buy” in other ways— expensive tickets to see her on tour or simply a promise of devotion and contribution to her fame.

But here’s the thing- Gaga is not even close to being a fameball. Her music, whether you like it or not, is distinct, catchy and new— and she’s well-trained in the classics. Gaga knows what she’s doing.

So what cues can we take from Gaga when it comes to journalism? We need to develop a brand that our news consumers trust, and we can’t expect them to pay for everything we give them. We need to offer something that no one else does, and we need to provide not just straight-up news (in Gaga’s case, music), but an entire consumption experience (let’s compare this with Gaga’s many costumes and outrageous videos). We need to grow a devoted group of followers, and we need to interact with them in a way that makes them trust us and interact with us, but still respect us. There does need to be a line drawn there.

And if nothing else, Gaga is a lesson in the facts that a.) a distinct and recognizable brand is irreplaceable and b.) if you want your business or news outlet or start-up or blog or whatever to stand out, you need to master the basics, understand the classics, and then use what you know to start something completely new.

“Do what you do best and link to the rest.”

May as well start this post off with a link to Mark Coddington’s post on the “Maxims of New Media.” Not sure what I do best, but may as well follow the first guideline! Coddington’s post essentially breaks down some of the buzz-phrases (Is that a word? Well if not, it is now. Maybe that can be what I do best- make up words. Or not.) in the new media discusso-sphere (there’s another one) and explains where they came from. I encourage you to check out the blog post to read that background, but here are my thoughts on the maxims he mentions!

• “Do what you do best and link to the rest.” Pretty simple thought, but one we often forget to attend to as we zip through thoughts and try to get that blog post or article up online. It takes an extra second to add the link, and instantly and easily allows the reader to find more information on a given topic or element of a single story. But don’t restrict linking to simply outside stories— link back to previous stories your newsroom posted as well. Show that you’ve been tracking the story or issue from the beginning; make it evident that you know what’s up and that you have a strong history with the subject at hand.
• “If the news is important, it will find me.” Interesting from a news distribution perspective, I suppose- but not really all that telling. This isn’t new to the new media landscape; it’s always been this way. If the news is really THAT important, it gets to everyone- through word of mouth or phone call if nothing else. Perhaps it’s an even more prevalent attitude thanks to social and new media, but it’s not really an innovative thought…though a
• “Information wants to be free.” Isn’t this one tricky? With all of the business model proposals going around to try to financially support journalistic work, it’s difficult to say that information really can be free. But it is still so essential that the news and information that needs to get out to the public is accessible. Not just technologically, but financially. We can’t leave out those who don’t have smartphones and e-readers. We as journalists, perhaps need to better understand other industries’ business models, specifically the advertising industry’s (they’ve been in the business of selling media since…always), to understand where our own could go.
• “It’s not information overload. It’s filter failure.” As more and more people learn the skills and develop the tools necessary to gather the news and tell a good story, our jobs as journalists become more about synthesizing, analyzing, de-complexifying (I don’t want to say simplifying, because complicated issues shouldn’t really be simplified— just explained). I understand and respect the fact that these types of endeavors are more expensive and are time-consuming, but they’re essential if we really want to make a difference with our work— and if we want to sustainably provide a product that people need and crave.
• “Our readers know more than we do.” In the world of new media, this maxim has often been used in reference to the rise of citizen journalism, but hasn’t this always been the case? Generally speaking, the mass of knowledge in a community about that community and it’s happenings has always outweighed that of the general knowledge in a newsroom. And with specialty magazines and news beats, those interested in reading often know more than those that end up writing. For example, I may know nothing about a specific form of biofuel before writing an article about it— but the reader that’s interested in that article is most likely someone with experience in the field. I need to make sure my content provides something valuable both for that knowledgeable reader and for someone who’s had no connection, experience or relationship with the topic.
• “The people formerly known as the audience.” Going back to the idea that more people can gather news and tell a story— obviously more people are able to actually engage and participate in the journalistic process. It’s important to include those people, and remember, once again, that the community around you (almost positively) knows more than you do.
• “Transparency is the new objectivity.” In an age where privacy becomes more and more scarce and chances are that even if you express an opinion to friends, it will get out, it’s increasingly important that we are transparent about our goals, motives and the way that we work. This doesn’t mean it’s time to shout our political views in the name of being transparent— but it does mean being honest about how and where we got information.

Again, I encourage you to check out the blog post yourself, and form your own opinions! Shoot ‘em my way— I’d be glad to hear them!

Throughout the month, I’ve kept planning to contribute to the Open Video Alliance “Open Video in 60 Seconds” contest- partially to contribute some thoughts to a cause I care about and am interested in, and on a more superficial level, because the winner receives a free trip to SXSW (a college kid/journalist/young adult/human’s dream, right?)… but never got around to it. Today was the last day to submit, and though I didn’t have a chance to put together anything entirely earth-shattering, I did come up with a few thoughts.

It’s too late to submit to the contest, but I figure that if nothing else, I can draw a little bit of your attention to open video! The site’s Wiki and pages on different Open Video issues explain everything better than I can, so I suggest that you check it out, learn a little bit about it, and join the conversation & exploration!

You can bet I’ll be posting some of my thoughts on different issues pertaining to open video in the coming posts… but for now, the video above poses just a few questions on things to think about.

Yesterday I had the opportunity to attend a day-long news briefing on the state of health in Missouri sponsored by the Association of Health Care Journalists. We heard from the Kansas City U.S. Census Bureau Regional Director, a few MO House representatives, the director of the state’s Department of Mental Health, the Youth Suicide prevention coordinator for the DMH and the director of the Department of Health and Senior Services on some of the issues they think are crucial focal points for Missouri agencies, policymakers and residents in the coming years and right now.

The sessions were valuable for a few reasons, on a general level. On the surface, I definitely came out with a few pages full of story ideas. But I also learned a little bit about how we, as journalists, can pay more attention to sensitivity and cohesiveness in our coverage as not to enhance the culture of fear but instead, to do what we really are here to do— inform people and, hopefully, have a positive impact while doing so.

One of the things the session did for me, personally, though, was solidify my interest in and passion for health journalism. Over the course of the past few years at the Missouri School of Journalism, I’ve had some time to really think about where my passions lie, what my skills are and what I’m interested in doing in the future. And though my mind is still pretty open, I know that I enjoy covering health-related issues and stories, and that passion also extends to other science and tech issues.

Obviously, right now is a crucial time for high-quality, cogent health journalism pieces… but health is always an issue that’s at the crux of public policy and of life. Good health or bad health— both our own and that of our family membered and loved ones— dictates so much of what we can do in our lives, and it’s so important to share the information that matters to make sure that more people know how to be healthy.

Specifically, I’m really interested in mental health issues and ensuring that the coverage we provide is holistic, eye-opening, effective and doesn’t do harm— there’s a degree of understanding and comprehension a journalist really needs to develop on their own before they can sensitively and accurately cover mental health issues. (Which just reminds me of how I wish I had years and years to go to school and learn more about all the things I want to cover!…but que sera sera, at least I have libraries.)

Anyway, I was really appreciative of the the AHCJ for organizing and sponsoring the conference— I got a lot out of it, and am excited to start telling more stories in the field of health journalism!

A quick look at the day’s national headlines for KOMU 8 News at Five.

An opinion piece in the Australian posted on January 23 explores the current state of journalism and defines several important roles in the “new” journalistic process. A portion of the article reads (emphasis mine):

There is a crucial social role for the news narrator or navigator, highlighting important stories and genuinely trying to weigh the value and moment of events. Citizen journalists do have an important and growing role, and the traditional profession is too rash and ready to be contemptuous of their contributions. And the cleverest citizen journalists will certainly be a prime target for mainstream media looking for the best talent.

We can view that “news narrator or navigator” as the authoritative voice of a news distributor we trust. In the online sphere, that may be an editor or a blogger who’s at the forefront of niche news; in mainstream TV news, it could be the evening news anchor. Citizen journalists and the mainstream media who pick up their content are self-explanatory, and are nothing new; just look to the news outlets that have collected home videos and pictures from “viewers” and “readers” for years. The Internet has basically simplified the process.

But what I think are more significant are two roles the piece presents a little bit later: the “composer” and the “echo chamber.” It reads (again, emphasis mine):

“It is becoming clear that there are two personality types in the world of content: the creators and the reverberators. The latter group is merely an editorial echo chamber: the noise is sometimes interesting, but they are neither composers nor musicians. If we make a comparison to tennis, in which the sublime Spaniard Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer fight out a final on centre court, the reverberators are like ball boys and ball girls. If one stretches the imagination you can almost imagine Arianna Huffington and Eric Schmidt scurrying around the court, part of the event but not why you pay money to attend. ”

In my convergence journalism capstone class, we’re discussing new ways to produce, market and distribute news: business models, news consumption tools, new storytelling forms. But as I think about our discussions, I realize how often we leave out the importance of quality of content and news and the journalism itself. I’m no luddite and I do understand that as I enter the workforce, part of my job as a journalist/reporter/producer/blogger/whatever will also be to understand and innovate those new business models and distribution tools… but at the same time, I think we spend insufficient time in class discussing how to be innovative composers of content. Not just forms of content, but of topics of content— analyzing city budgets and learning how to simplify complicated processes for a general audience. I want to be the kind of journalist that makes a difference not just because of the way I tell a story, but the story that I’m telling- is it new? Is it necessary? Does it spark change?
We do need to learn to be effective editorializers and reverberators. But without the content to begin with, no amount of analysis or distribution will serve our purpose.