Professor Aggrey Brown has died. The tribute below summarises his contribution to the field of journalism in the Caribbean.
http://go-jamaica.com/news/read_article.php?id=33428
Wednesday, 23 November 2011
Tuesday, 22 November 2011
Finding usable photographs
Photos you can use. Finding usable photographs -- that is, photos you have a right to use -- is an ongoing problem for people who run weblogs they would like to illustrate or news web sites that they want to keep visually up to date. Student news web sites in particular have this problem. For instance, as I write this, the big news of the day (Christmas Day, 2006) is that rock 'n roll legend James Brown has died. If I wanted to note that on my site and use his picture, that might once have presented an insurmountable problem.
No more, however.
Using photo posting sites such as Flickr and the idea of Creative Commons, small media sites that don't have the budget for wire or syndicated photos can have the illustrations they need to dress up their pages and present the kind of unique information that a photo can provide.
No more, however.
Using photo posting sites such as Flickr and the idea of Creative Commons, small media sites that don't have the budget for wire or syndicated photos can have the illustrations they need to dress up their pages and present the kind of unique information that a photo can provide.
Tuesday, 15 November 2011
Who cares about conscience?
"Every journalist, from the newsroom to the boardroom, must have a personal sense of ethics and responsibility - a moral compass. What's more, they have a responsibility to voice their personal conscience out loud, and allow others around them to do so as well." Thus spake Kovach and Rosenstiel in their account of The Elements of Journalism. The authors argue, further, that within this principle are subsumed all the other principles that journalists have formulated to guide their actions. The sentiment is praiseworthy - but is it practicable today? And is it relevant to our Caribbean context?
Monday, 14 November 2011
How to make money on your news content website
Forget what you might have heard: Journalists can earn money publishing online. Here are some tips from OJR readers. This article is designed to help journalists learn how to make extra money, or even a full-time wage, by publishing independently online. It is not intended to provide an online revenue model for established news organizations. Heck, they've got business managers. They shouldn't need a wiki to show them what to do.
- Commissions / Affiliate links
- Advertising networks
- Selling your own ads
- Paid content
- Sponsorships/Grants
Read the original post here.
Saturday, 12 November 2011
Congrats, CJR: "Strong press, Strong democracy"
"What journalism needs, it has been said time and again, is more and better criticism." In the Fall of 1961, the Columbia Journalism Review began production with the intention of satisfying this need. This year marks the fiftieth anniversary of the Review. We congratulate the CJR and wonder when we in the Caribbean will have a similar watchdog for our Fourth Estate.After all, as the Review points out: a strong press is necessary for a strong democracy.
http://www.cjr.org/magazine/index.php
http://www.cjr.org/magazine/index.php
Sunday, 6 November 2011
Easy like Sunday mornings after....
I've been to two shows in the last two weeks, both potentially excellent, both significantly flawed. Last week I saw Miss Miles at the Little Carib - a strong play about an extraordinary woman. The thing, though, is that the play went on waaay too long. For the last half hour, most of the audience were growing restless, their minds leading them to one overwhelming question - when, dear Lord, would the performance end? Tony Hall's portrayal of Gene Miles was rendered with sensitivity and a commendable dramatic range by Cecilia Salazar, but Miss Salazar simply couldn't keep the play alive, once she died. Its death and hers pretty well coincided.
I have read all the superlatives about Miss Miles in the daily newspapers. The one superlative I never heard was 'the LOOONGEST' - and yet, it was the one quality of the play that framed most other comments after the performance ended. It started at 6.00 and ended after 9.00 I think. And it lost all dramatic tension immediately after Miss Miles died at about 8.30. As Miss Miles reminds us, Gene Miles was a Roman Catholic. After her death, for the audience as well as for the dead woman, the rest indeed was Purgatory.
And then again last night, I went to the Extemporama show put on at SWWTU. The show, which is organised by Contender, has become something of a tradition by older calypso lovers. As usual last night, the old Masters of extempo performed well. Gypsy - good. Lady Africa, Shortpants....And Relator gave a truly masterful performance of old calypsoes. BUT, again, a show that was to have started at 5 p.m. never began till nearly 5.45, and ended after 9 p.m. There were clear dips in the performance, and even when I was enjoying it, I was very conscious that the performers were mostly - how can I say this tactfully? They were OLD. The audience was made up of older people. And if we don't do something about it soon, in spite of all the Carnival competitions, in aittle while extempo will quite likely be a thing of the past.
Now here's the thing that troubles me in all of this - WHO are the reviewers who will tell the less pleasant truths about local productions that are significantly flawed? These days, a misguided spirit of loyalty seems to have most reviewers bending over to be kind and positive about them. But this is not what our local entertainment industry needs to grow. Producers and performers alike need to hear the unpleasant truths sometimes. Somebody needs to go beyond support for local productions that is limited to bland recaps of their content and a polite 'good try.' I want to hear somebody say, sometimes, look, people, potentially excellent stuff here was seriously undermined by self-indulgence. Keep it crisp! I want to hear somebody tell last night's anthem singer - look, child, let me tell you what your best friends mightn't say - yuh kill de people anthem!
Just as happeend with Miss Miles, the audience said all of this and more in the car park last night, and as they were driving home. AND the audience said, which was also true, that both performances had real high points. We come out to support the arts in Trinidad - we're already there for you. But you owe us more consistent quality, rather than predominantly good intentions.
And to this end, where are the brave reviewers who are not afraid to provide a little constructive criticism, instead of damning the future of entertainment in Trinidad and Tobago with fulsome praise? Honest reviews, this is your cue: Enter stage left!
I have read all the superlatives about Miss Miles in the daily newspapers. The one superlative I never heard was 'the LOOONGEST' - and yet, it was the one quality of the play that framed most other comments after the performance ended. It started at 6.00 and ended after 9.00 I think. And it lost all dramatic tension immediately after Miss Miles died at about 8.30. As Miss Miles reminds us, Gene Miles was a Roman Catholic. After her death, for the audience as well as for the dead woman, the rest indeed was Purgatory.
And then again last night, I went to the Extemporama show put on at SWWTU. The show, which is organised by Contender, has become something of a tradition by older calypso lovers. As usual last night, the old Masters of extempo performed well. Gypsy - good. Lady Africa, Shortpants....And Relator gave a truly masterful performance of old calypsoes. BUT, again, a show that was to have started at 5 p.m. never began till nearly 5.45, and ended after 9 p.m. There were clear dips in the performance, and even when I was enjoying it, I was very conscious that the performers were mostly - how can I say this tactfully? They were OLD. The audience was made up of older people. And if we don't do something about it soon, in spite of all the Carnival competitions, in aittle while extempo will quite likely be a thing of the past.
Now here's the thing that troubles me in all of this - WHO are the reviewers who will tell the less pleasant truths about local productions that are significantly flawed? These days, a misguided spirit of loyalty seems to have most reviewers bending over to be kind and positive about them. But this is not what our local entertainment industry needs to grow. Producers and performers alike need to hear the unpleasant truths sometimes. Somebody needs to go beyond support for local productions that is limited to bland recaps of their content and a polite 'good try.' I want to hear somebody say, sometimes, look, people, potentially excellent stuff here was seriously undermined by self-indulgence. Keep it crisp! I want to hear somebody tell last night's anthem singer - look, child, let me tell you what your best friends mightn't say - yuh kill de people anthem!
Just as happeend with Miss Miles, the audience said all of this and more in the car park last night, and as they were driving home. AND the audience said, which was also true, that both performances had real high points. We come out to support the arts in Trinidad - we're already there for you. But you owe us more consistent quality, rather than predominantly good intentions.
And to this end, where are the brave reviewers who are not afraid to provide a little constructive criticism, instead of damning the future of entertainment in Trinidad and Tobago with fulsome praise? Honest reviews, this is your cue: Enter stage left!
Wednesday, 2 November 2011
Who's keeping the gates?
There's a lesson I particularly want my journalism students to learn from the Crime Watch debacle, and it's a rather humbling one, but necessary. People, you know that big role we've been telling you about - the gatekeeper role? Well, you may need to think about exactly how it fits into your job specs today.
Let me tell you what I mean. You know that we've been telling you that what you do is important partly because you have a critical role in determining what information reaches the public. You choose what to focus on. You choose what to produce, and what to disseminate. And so, you decide what the public knows, and what is placed on their agenda.
Since you're young and often quite irreverent, however, I suspect you've already begun to question the party line, such as it is. And now, along comes the present furore about Ian Alleyne, and you may have begun to realise that things just aren't so cut and dried any more. Because, here it is: like the mouse that roared, the audience just rose up and said, we aren't taking the stuff you've been letting through the gates anymore.
And what's most interesting - they showed us that they had the power to do it. They selected content from that programme, edited out bits they wanted to focus on, and placed those bits under the spotlight. They distributed it to friends, and friends of friends, on all the social media. They decided to identify standards they wanted for publishing and broadcasting. And they took the responsibility the media were afraid to accept: to say to TATT - act now. And TATT has acted. It acted late, but it has acted!
So: news flash: Man bites medium! This time, the audience stayed indoors and locked the gates against both Crime Watch and, ultimately, TV6. Technology has given them the power to do that. And, may I add - what they did to Ian Alleyne they can do to you if you produce stories that offend.
The audience no longer has to accept anything you hand out. In fact, they can turn away from you and look to themselves for information once you lose your credibility. But as you may realise, that, of course, presents its own dangers.
This, then, is the theme of my lesson for today: your role is still important, but you are no longer the one controlling the conversation. So, to use an expression that was in vogue when I was your age - watch your contents!
Let me tell you what I mean. You know that we've been telling you that what you do is important partly because you have a critical role in determining what information reaches the public. You choose what to focus on. You choose what to produce, and what to disseminate. And so, you decide what the public knows, and what is placed on their agenda.
Since you're young and often quite irreverent, however, I suspect you've already begun to question the party line, such as it is. And now, along comes the present furore about Ian Alleyne, and you may have begun to realise that things just aren't so cut and dried any more. Because, here it is: like the mouse that roared, the audience just rose up and said, we aren't taking the stuff you've been letting through the gates anymore.
And what's most interesting - they showed us that they had the power to do it. They selected content from that programme, edited out bits they wanted to focus on, and placed those bits under the spotlight. They distributed it to friends, and friends of friends, on all the social media. They decided to identify standards they wanted for publishing and broadcasting. And they took the responsibility the media were afraid to accept: to say to TATT - act now. And TATT has acted. It acted late, but it has acted!
So: news flash: Man bites medium! This time, the audience stayed indoors and locked the gates against both Crime Watch and, ultimately, TV6. Technology has given them the power to do that. And, may I add - what they did to Ian Alleyne they can do to you if you produce stories that offend.
The audience no longer has to accept anything you hand out. In fact, they can turn away from you and look to themselves for information once you lose your credibility. But as you may realise, that, of course, presents its own dangers.
This, then, is the theme of my lesson for today: your role is still important, but you are no longer the one controlling the conversation. So, to use an expression that was in vogue when I was your age - watch your contents!
Too little too late?
A number of organisations have joined the discussion about Crime Watch. The latest to do so is the TTPBA, adding its voice [belatedly] to that of MATT (the Media Association of Trinidad and Tobago):
http://ctntworld.com/uploadedFiles/CNEWS/Local/Local_Categories/TV6CrimeWatchTTPBAPressRelease
It's good that these organisations have finally take a position on this very serious issue. My question is - where were they before the public outcry? The antics being performed on Crime Watch were hardly secret. The growing public discontent was clear. And the cause for concern was obvious - disrespect for human life and dignity was a normal position for Mr. Alleyne for some time previous to the airing of his video showing the rape of a teenage girl. Couldn't some intervention have been made before the credibility, not of the show alone but of the station as well, was undermined?
It's clear that intervening in the affairs of another organisation is a sensitive task. I'll tell you what seems to me to be an even more sensitive issue, though: explaining to the public why all these people didn't think the issue was important enough to do something before it turned into a hot mess. Before TATT had to intervene and wave the Draft Broadcasting Code at the media again, at a time when they have clearly been caught with their collective pants down, and their ineffectiveness dangling in the wind.
A member of the MATT executive appeared on a morning talk show yesterday and said that MATT has no powers. Well, DUH! If you consistently fail to act decisively, then you have given away your own power, haven't you? Because you have surrendered your moral authority to speak on important issues affecting your profession. This is true for MATT. It is true for the TTPBA. In fact, it is true for all the other media houses in this country who said and did nothing before the public cry of outrage shamed every professional journalist in the country.
If journalists fail to move decisively to ensure that their profession is regarded as credible by their audiences, they can blame no one but themselves if those audiences turn away from them - and towards people like Ian Alleyne who, if they're wrong, are at least wrong and strong.
http://ctntworld.com/uploadedFiles/CNEWS/Local/Local_Categories/TV6CrimeWatchTTPBAPressRelease
It's good that these organisations have finally take a position on this very serious issue. My question is - where were they before the public outcry? The antics being performed on Crime Watch were hardly secret. The growing public discontent was clear. And the cause for concern was obvious - disrespect for human life and dignity was a normal position for Mr. Alleyne for some time previous to the airing of his video showing the rape of a teenage girl. Couldn't some intervention have been made before the credibility, not of the show alone but of the station as well, was undermined?
It's clear that intervening in the affairs of another organisation is a sensitive task. I'll tell you what seems to me to be an even more sensitive issue, though: explaining to the public why all these people didn't think the issue was important enough to do something before it turned into a hot mess. Before TATT had to intervene and wave the Draft Broadcasting Code at the media again, at a time when they have clearly been caught with their collective pants down, and their ineffectiveness dangling in the wind.
A member of the MATT executive appeared on a morning talk show yesterday and said that MATT has no powers. Well, DUH! If you consistently fail to act decisively, then you have given away your own power, haven't you? Because you have surrendered your moral authority to speak on important issues affecting your profession. This is true for MATT. It is true for the TTPBA. In fact, it is true for all the other media houses in this country who said and did nothing before the public cry of outrage shamed every professional journalist in the country.
If journalists fail to move decisively to ensure that their profession is regarded as credible by their audiences, they can blame no one but themselves if those audiences turn away from them - and towards people like Ian Alleyne who, if they're wrong, are at least wrong and strong.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)