I’m a fan of news. I enjoy watching, reading, and listening to it. Of course, you can only consume so much of it. For every story, there are potentially endless news organizations and publications that are covering it in their own way. If you just listen to what a particular source has to say, then you’re probably not getting the whole story. Newsy is a great resource for those of us who are busy and want to see a story covered as completely as possible in just a couple minutes.
This site provides videos about some of the latest and hottest news stories, and just like with most television news programs, an anchor is used to help cover the story. However, when you watch one of the videos, you’ll see how the coverage is different. Instead of approaching a story in their own unique way, they use existing coverage from television, newspapers, magazines, and even blogs to give you the big picture. In a couple minutes, you’ll know more about a story from Newsy than you would if you used that time in any other way.
One of the enjoyable parts about being involved with a site like Lockergnome, is the ability to present an opinion about what the newspapers would have us believe is ‘hot news’. In order to not enter into a discussion about what exactly ‘hot news’ is, I’ll present my own definition of what I feel ‘hot news’ is. ‘Hot news’ would include first reports of any major world or local event that is of interest to most who read or view it and the report is made immediately following the event.
I am being facetious in the title of this article, Hot News – Can We Even Speak Of It, but it appears to me that some folks would be happy if this were the case. The problem being is that newspapers seem to feel that they and they alone hold the rights to when news happens and that their right is absolute. In a recent article it states that:
When an aggregator like Google News publishes newspaper headlines, is the company treading on thin ice? What about aggregators that publish headlines and a one-line excerpt? What about those that simply rewrite the facts contained in the story and publish a new account in their own words?
I don’t believe that anyone would suggest that violating copyright law is O.K. But what I do argue is that newspapers chose posting their news on the Internet for all to see. Magazines did the same thing. Neither had any idea what would happen when they chose to do this. I am sure the feeling was that we have to get our stuff on the Internet because, well because, it is the latest craze, fade, whatever the thinking was. Now that the newspapers and magazines are getting bit in the butt, they cry foul.
The Internet is a different ball game than what the newspapers and magazines have previously had to deal with. We must not forget that the Internet involves the entire world and not just a single location. I do not believe that if all newspapers or magazines were to pull their news from the Internet that we consumers would still not get the news instantly without their content.
This is just my 2 cents.
The idea of needing multiple eReaders makes me gag. Seriously, why can’t we all agree that it’s either Kindle, the Apple Tablet, or both? Why do we need to make things more complicated by offering eReaders for multiple publications? The very idea seems to be overkill.
Others have pointed out the problem with the Kindle becoming the de facto device for digital deliveries. Amazon wants too much of the revenue for it to be worthwhile, according to sources. So in that sense, utilizing a device not controlled by traditional media does certainly pose a problem to be sure.
Based on everything I have seen, it looks as if nothing is going to be truly centralized in this space. And perhaps this is a good thing. So this leaves the question we must all ask. Do we want a single eReader solution like the Kindle? Perhaps, instead, we should cheer for competition despite the other headaches this may present in the future. Hit the comments on this; I am interested in your thoughts on this one.
The people over at Facebook are going to try and get large page users to authenticate who they are. The hope is that by doing this, Facebook may be able to weed out those pages that are falsely being posted claiming to be someone or something else. This new verification process started last week and it is still unclear how Facebook will implement this new policy.
According to a recent news article it also stated that:
It gives three different ways of certifying page ownership.
- “Add a badge or a Fan Box widget to your website that links to your Facebook Page.”
- “Add an email address that is officially affiliated with the entity of your Page to your personal Facebook account. You can also add the email address of a company authorized to manage your brand (e.g., management or PR firm).”
- “Add another admin to your Page who has an email address that is officially affiliated with the entity your Page represents.”
The latter two options are straightforward. The first one is more interesting, as it cleverly both proves that the page owner has control over their own web site, and gets the owner actively promoting the page (and Facebook itself).
As large pages grow to have millions of users — many of whom comment, “like,” or otherwise engage with the page regularly — the real estate value is continuing to go up. And just like real estate in real-life, this means more shady characters will try to fraudulently claim pages as their own. To that end, Facebook is also introducing a way to resolve ownership conflicts.
From the site:
When a Page appears to be authorized, often we’ll receive a complaint for removal from another claimed representative of the entity promoted on the Page. Sometimes this is caused by the complaining representative being unaware of the Page administrator’s affiliation. As a courtesy to you, we forward your contact information in such circumstances to the complaining party in an effort to facilitate a quick resolution. Please check the ‘I Agree” box below to acknowledge that you agree to this process.
This new authentication form is hardly the end of the problem. Twitter, for example, has also recently rolled out a verification process for accounts, yet people continue to make fake ones.
This does seem to be nothing more that a lame way in trying to clean up Facebook and curtail the fraudulent sites. It also seems like a great way for Facebook to end in a legal mess if they make the wrong call and do authorize pages that could be fraudulent.
Comments as always are welcome.
With so much great content on the Internet, it can be difficult to pick and choose what you want to read on a regular basis. With that said, many of us have our own personal collection of sites that we enjoy reading on a daily basis, and in a way, this content is kind of like our daily newspaper. Of course, reading content online is much different than reading it in print, and speaking from personal experience, there are times when I’d rather hold paper in my hands than stare at a screen. A service called zinepal.com makes online content printable.
The ability to print online content has always been available, but the way in which zinepal.com formats the content helps to make it an attractive solution. You just enter the URLs that you want to select stories from (you can also use content from Google News and Google Blog Search results, providing an interesting way to stay informed about coverage of a certain topic) and create your nicely formatted document that reads more like a newspaper or magazine. While we’re mainly talking about printing this document, you can also just enjoy the formatting on your computer screen if you wish to do that instead.
Over at the Financial Times editor Lionel Barber said that most news organizations will be charging for content in the next 12 months. He also stated that he is confident that this will happen. It is also believed that Robert Murdoch and his news group would start charging within a year while the New York Times, could begin charging for online news within three to four weeks.
The article also states that:
Barber made a distinction between “crafted” journalism and blogs “largely based on opinion rather than established fact [and] becoming increasingly influential in setting the news agenda”. “Bloggers have broken important stories and will continue to do so,” he said.
But he said they “do not operate according to the same standards as those who aspire to and practise crafted journalism. They are often happy to report rumour as fact, arguing that readers or fellow networkers can step in to correct those “facts” if they turn out to be wrong. They are rarely engaged in the pursuit of original news: their bread and butter is opinion and comment.”
“I do not wish to sound precious. British journalism has always put a premium on the scoop and it has long blurred the distinction between news and comment,” said Barber.
“The rise of bloggers may simply signal the last gasp of the age of deference, not just in politics but also in general social mores in Britain, America and elsewhere. Nor does it follow that the worldwide web has dumbed down journalism.
Interesting. So what is a journalist? A simple definition would be a writer for newspapers or magazines. So if you are a ‘journalist’ and you constantly reported the story about Microsoft buying Yahoo, day after day, which turned out to be a non event, does that make you a blogger? If you are a ‘journalist’ and you attack a political organization because they differ in their opinion to what your newspaper or magazine supports, and you use half truths or down right lies, does that make you a blogger? If your newspaper or magazines accepts letters to the editor, are they not just comments? So does that make the editor a blogger?
Hold on for one moment. You ‘journalists’, newspapers and magazines came onto the Internet and have dug yourself into a hole because you were not smart enough to succeed. You came into the back yard of geeks thinking that all you had to do to be successful was to splash your name on a web site. Now that you are having financial troubles you blame the bloggers. You blame Google. You blame everyone else but yourselves.
What do you think?
I create and view a number of documents each day, and I have to say, sometimes I get tired of viewing documents in the same way each and every time. If you’re not messing with documents very often, then you probably won’t be bothered by this, but people like me are exposed to documents so much that we want a different experience. I’m a big fan of books and magazines, and I like the format that they’re presented in. Even if your documents aren’t like books or magazines, you can certainly make them seem like they are with YUDU Freedom.
To get started, select a PDF to upload, enter your e-mail address, and provide some additional information. When your online publication is ready, a link will be sent to you, and you can then view it and share it with others. Your readers can add bookmarks and notes to the publications, and they can also view the content in a variety of ways. Don’t get me wrong, a boring document is a boring document, but YUDU Freedom will make viewing these boring documents a little more interesting.
Steve Ballmer, the new spokes person for the mighty software empire from Redmond aka Microsoft, is now making predictions about the future of newspapers and magazines. In his wisdom he believes that within 10 years we will no longer be able to view newspapers or magazines in print form. But in an article over at the San Jose Mercury news, this one statement[s] expressed my feelings when I read what Stevie had to say:
Technology has yet to deliver a replacement for the convenience of having a paper product to take along on the subway, to the bathroom (insert joke here), to the doctor’s office and to read at the checkout stand.
We are all aware that one can read the latest news on your iPhone or other gadget, but the one word that sticks out is convenience. Putting the issues of being ‘green’ and saving a tree aside, tossing out printed material may be harder than one might think.
But what do you think? Is Ballmer onto something? Or should he stick to computers and his quest of Yahoo?
Share your thoughts.
I view and read a lot of content on my computer each day, and while I’m able to enjoy it in the way that it’s presented, sometimes I wish that the experience of reading online was similar to the experience of reading an actual book or magazine. I love the feeling of accomplishment that comes from flipping through all of the pages, and while that can’t physically be done on the computer, it can be simulated. Issuu presents content in this familiar way, and it’s a great service for professional publishers or people like you and I that just want to view and share documents in magazine format.
When you arrive at the site, select one of the featured magazines and take a look at the interface. You can flip through the pages, zoom in, go full-screen, write comments, and embed these publications. Once you’ve read any available content that interests you, upload your own documents and give Issuu a try for yourself. I’ve seen services like this before, but this is my favorite by far, and I’m sure designers and publishers are going to love it.
Besides the obvious “I read Lockergnome” response, I am interested in which print publications those of you in the IT field are reading these days? Speaking for myself, I enjoy CPU Magazine, Linux Magazine and wait for it…PC Magazine.
But I am remain curious as to what other trade mags you, the Lockergnome readers, can’t live without? Perhaps it is something you only read on occasion? Maybe even a publication that you simply pick up while waiting at the check out of your local computer store. Whatever it may be, I am interested in hearing about it. Should you be so inclined, please take a couple of minutes to make your comments above and tell me about your favorite publications. Inquiring minds are interested, namely mine. See you tomorrow!