One of the things I tell students to do like Chicagoans vote — early and often — is to Google themselves. You need to know what’s out there about you so you can control the public presentation of yourself when it’s time to look for a job. I demand students clean up their online acts well before potential employers may be lurking around as faux Facebook friends looking for reasons to dump half the stack of resumes they’ve got. I Googled myself and found this YouTube clip. It’s raw footage from an interview I did with some of my Oregon State University students on the impact of new media on the election of President Obama:
October 18, 2010
SEO Ethics and Accidental Libel: Oprah and Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan, Oh My!
Posted by pamcyt under Medill, Medill 201, NMC 301 | Tags: Ethics, Facebook, Journalism Ethics, libel, Lindsay Lohan, Medill, Paris Hilton, SEO, Tweets |Leave a Comment
We’re requiring students to include key words and a Tweet for every story they write in class. Two interesting ethical issues came up in my labs. First, students wanted to know what their goal is for the key words — are they supposed to use words that accurately reflect the story or should they sex their tags up to grab the most hits?
How do we balance those goals, they asked. What’s the ethical decision, they wondered. If you can work ‘Paris Hilton’ into your key words, even if it requires the most bizarre stretch, do you go for it to increase your SEO? Is that wrong? Don’t you want viewers/readers? If using certain words gets readers, why not? But what about credibility, accuracy and truth? But does your truth count if nobody reads its?
The second issue that arose was students’ tendency to accidentally libel subjects in their Tweets. In their actual stories they’d correctly write “arrested in connection with” or “allegedly such and such” but their Tweets were full-on convictions of nearly everyone.
“Allegedly” is just too many characters to fit in a Tweet’s 140-character limit.
Both issues sparked lively class discussions and raised all the right ethical and practical questions.
October 5, 2010
Old Dog New Tricks
Posted by pamcyt under New Media Blogs, NMC 301 | Tags: Adobe, Journalism School, Medill, New Media, new tricks, Photoshop, upgrades, vimeo, vlogging |1 Comment
I am thrilled to report the news that I am home, which means back in Evanston and back at Northwestern University’s Medill School — my favorite place to commit journalism.
The revival of this blog offers a way for me to continue chronicling my hike up the learning curve of new media. Just when I thought I’d rocked the whole social media Twitterverse, it’s time to shoot some vimeo for the vlog.
In my neverending pursuit to find more ways to tell people stuff, I’ll drag you along for this, too.
Medill offers faculty and staff a wide range of technological seminars and classes to keep us all upgraded.
Cheers!
January 5, 2010
Long-form video storytelling from Advancing the Story
Posted by pamcyt under New Media Training, NMC 301 | Tags: Advancing the Story, Deb Wenger, documentary films, long-form video, storytelling, video editing |Leave a Comment
Again, Deb Wenger from Advancing the Story gives us a terrific post to learn from:
Long-form video storytelling
Posted on January 4th, 2010 by Deb Wenger
When we used to talk about the advantages of the Web, we often mentioned the “bottomless newshole” - the ability to post more and longer stories online.
We’ve learned a lot since then, most notably that the quality of the content definitely matters. Still, the fact is, there’s more space for long-form video online than in most TV newscasts.
Michael Farrell is a photographer and producer for the Nebraska ETV Network. Speaking to a group of Ole Miss journalism students about crafting documentaries, he offered advice that seems relevant to anyone who wants to tell compelling stories.
When choosing the people to include in a story, Farrell says the tendency is to interview the first person who will talk to you. Instead, he urges storytellers to find the right person.
January 5, 2010
For students not brave enough to Friend me on FB, here are New Media must-reads from my FB page
Posted by pamcyt under NMC 301 | Tags: Gawker, Google, Inside Google, mashable, New York Times, Time, Tweets, Twitter |Leave a Comment
Once just a fad, Twitter is developing into a powerful form of communication. What its growth says about us and the future of American innovation
RT @mashable HOW TO: Do Almost Anything Online in 2010 http://bit.ly/6qsI1f
Television Review – ‘Inside the Mind of Google’ – A Peek Inside Google, Its Methods and Repercussion www.nytimes.com The best way to watch “Inside the Mind of Google,” Maria Bartiromo’s report on the Internet giant Thursday on CNBC, is to not watch …
Pamela Cytrynbaum – http://nyti.ms/6mSkp6Inside a Company That Mistook Itself for a Verb
A quiz on the personalities and happenings that defined 2009 — from geopolitics and gossip to commerce and celebrity.
The Year in Questions – http://nyti.ms/7pvYIh
Pamela Cytrynbaum Reading: “Facebook Fugitive Taunts Cops with Pictures and Status Updates – Craig lazie lynch – Gawker”( http://twitthis.com/2qshrq )
Remember how, in Catch Me If You Can, fugitive Leonardo DiCaprio kept calling Detective Tom Hanks to taunt him? Here is a convicted burglar doing the same thing, in real time on Facebook. Should we celebrate or fear him?
It’s a new year, which means it’s time to make resolutions, take on fresh challenges, learn new things and change our lives for the better. Perhaps you want to
Michael Farrell 





October 20, 2010
Seething Online Trolls or Our Beloved Readers: Some newspapers shutting the lid on Pandora’s Box
Posted by pamcyt under Ethics, Medill, Medill 201, New Media Models | Tags: Damon Kiesow, nasty reader comments, online trolls, Pandora's Box, Portland (Maine) Press, Poynter, reader comments, readers |Leave a Comment
What do you do with trolls – those seething anonymous online commenters who post useless rantings in the comment section of blogs, news websites, anywhere they can. What is to be done? Newspapers have a long history of selecting which members of the public have their opinions made public. The job title was “Letters Editor,” and that person literally went through hundreds of letters from readers and selected a wide range to publish. They confirmed the writer’s identity and intent to publish and made agreed-upon changes with the guidelines of the paper.
Well, that was quaint. Now it’s every troll for him/herself out there, spewing whatever bile they want. Heated discussions ensued about how to balance community standards and free speech. Does having access to a computer give you the right to free speech anywhere you want to spit? If your local college newspaper allows cursewords does that have an impact on what comments the larger newspaper should allow? Do racists have a ‘right’ to rant? What about grammatically disasterous comments? Do people have a ‘right’ to embarrass themselves?
All great questions forced upon us by the medium transforming the message — and the masses. Media are responding to commenters in different ways. Some have stopped comments entirely. Others try (often in vain) to monitor and make decisions case-by-case. The Portland Press Herald dropped reader comments. Period. See what you think: