journalism

In regard to the nuttiness about whether reporters should vote, all I have to say is:

Is it OK to write about sex without first becoming a eunuch?

The grumbling by some Associated Press members has "gone public" and is nicely summarized by Forbes writer Louis Hau, who asks: "Do newspapers still need The Associated Press?

For me, the Super Tuesday round of primaries has one clear, across-the-board winner: The New York Times. Why? Because nytimes.com took advantage of one great advantages of the online medium over broadcasting, offering a wealth of highly local detail through a very nice drill-down interactive graphical interface.

The #1 national newspaper managed to be very local, offering me data on how the vote in Columbia County, Ga., where I live, compared with the vote in other counties in Georgia.

I was looking over Tim McGuire's syllabus for a class he's teaching at Arizona State, Business and Future of Journalism, and one paragraph really caught my eye:

Mark Luckie's post What the journalism industry can learn from porn is getting some linkage for its observations that purveyors of pornography have done a much better jobs than purveyors of journalism when it comes to taking advantage of new media. True enough, but there are other lessons I think that deserve some attention.

There are two kinds of people in this world. There are those who implement Internet filtering. And there are those who hate Internet filtering. Sam Zell's memo putting an end to filtering at the Tribune Company is getting cheers from the victim side of that line. On2 recalls:

I learned of the British Airways crash-landing at Heathrow yesterday from Richard Sambrook's blog, which is in my RSS reader. He happened to be waiting in an airport lounge, shot a phonecam picture, and posted it by mobile phone. Naturally I checked the Guardian, which was a bit slow out of the gate, the BBC, which was quite on top of things, and the Times, which was somewhere in the middle.