幫自己做一下筆記

看了中時電子報總編輯郭至楨「發刊」部落格的這段話之後，讓我頗有疑惑：

中時電子報－「編輯部落格」便是依此理念，希望透過專業與品質兼具的Blog寫手，逐步推廣於一般大眾之間，讓所有具專業與理想的Bloger都可以共享網路媒體資源，發揮新聞媒體效益的最大化，共創未來網路媒體新圖騰。

粗體字是我加的。什麼是「新聞媒體效益的最大化」？又什麼是「共創未來網路媒體新圖騰」？

相對於部落格的迅速發展，以媒體為新聞評論式的部落格卻寥寥無幾。以往在閱讀報紙時，總是會仔細的閱讀「社論或新聞評論」，不啻可以從中窺得一些對於事件的觀察與態度，總有更精闢的觀點與反向的思維。

「以媒體為新聞評論式的部落格」？這是在說什麼樣的東西？

以下是我讀「Blogging, Journalism & Credibility」會議紀錄後的個人註解。看完整篇紀錄後，應該可以釐清我自己不少疑惑。也送給即將開始寫 blog 的 blogger/journalists。

頁11，Alex Jones 說 blogger 別高興的太早，你們才正要和走過百年來的新聞界一樣，開始學習如何取得和失去「信度」這個東西：

Bloggers, on the other hand, are in the early stages of figuring out how to win and lose credibility with their audiences. Jones pointed out that at this early stage, bloggers’ credibility is something that is yet to be attacked or undermined in the same way that mainstream journalism has by, you know, a century of use.”

頁12，Jay Rosen 解釋了為什麼有一些 blog，雖然由傳統 journalism 標準來看，可能根本是零散且毫無實質內容，但卻是有莫名其妙的極高價值：

The most influential bloggers (and thus one might argue – those with the most perceived credibility) are those who help their communities (no longer an “audience”) make sense of the jumble of information out there on the web. To do this, they are expert in “the art of linking”: pointing people to other sources of information on the web by hyper-linking chunks of text on their own blogs to the URL web addresses of other web pages and blog posts. “If we look at tapping distributed knowledge around the web, the people who know how to do that are bloggers. If we look at news as conversation, which is such an important metaphor today, the people putting that into practice are bloggers.”

頁12，這一段是沒有寫過 blog 的 journalist 比較難理解的：

Thus, while bloggers depend upon the work of professional journalists that is available on the web as raw materials for their conversations and web of links, they have created new kinds of information flows, along with the and structures and norms to deal with them.

頁15，新聞消費之供需和緊張關係：

Chris Lydon points out that the current situation is not bloggers vs. journalists, but rather the “blogosphere versus the world that institutional journalism created.” The main problem, he says, is that “we’re not well informed.”

頁16，信度來自於新聞內容的「客觀性」，還是讀者對你的「尊敬」？

Andrew Nachison of the Mediacenter believes credibility is not dependent on objectivity, but rather on respect: “focusing on why you do what you do, whether you’re a journalist or a blogger.”

頁17，問：你需要的是「短期信度」還是「長期信度」？

I (Berkman Fellow Rebecca MacKinnon) pointed out that there are also issues of shortterm credibility and long-term credibility. If you’re thinking about building credibility and approval from your audience in the short term, you’ll only give them what they want 17 to hear and reinforce their conventional wisdom. But if you’re focused on building credibility over the long run, your calculations will be quite different when it comes to doing the right thing” – bringing forth information that your community (formerly audience) may not think they want to know in the short term because it’s upsetting and makes them feel bad about themselves, but which, over time, will be seen as a critical piece of information that society needed.

頁19，Judith Donath：

Assuming most people are busy, a few people must come forward to perform this costly evaluating function for the rest of society. Newspapers do this by staking their own reputation on the reputation of the journalists they hire. Sorting out the credibility of individual bloggers is a much more messy process. One way of evaluating credibility is through the web of links that bloggers choose to build around some blogs but not others – and the positive or negative characterizations that they give each other.

頁20，Wikipedia 的創辦人 Jimmy Wales 說明 credibility 和 fact checking 的三種模式：

Personal disclosure – the bloggers’ model – is one approach. Second, for established media organizations, credibility comes from “organizational authority.” Wikipedia shows a third way: “the wiki way is another process, a collaborative review process,” through which users can feel assured that the information they’re receiving has been vetted by the collective wisdom and fact-checking of many eyes and brains.

頁20，Jonathan Zittrain 說明 journalist 在寫作時避免 public footprints 過顯的狀況：

Does this have to do with a journalist’s need to keep their public personality footprint from getting too large – which they and their news organizations fear would harm their credibility as objective reporters of news? Many journalists in the room agreed that the fact that they are journalists has a tremendous impact on the way they live their private lives.

頁21，Bille Mitchell(from Poynter Institute)說：

If journalism is becoming a conversation and not a lecture, it becomes more of a relationship and less of a contract. What, then, does it take for the relationship to survive? If transparency is not enough to build trust, what might be?

頁22延伸至頁25，由 Daver Winer 和 Jill Abramson 所引起的一場論戰：

A heated debate arose when Jill Abramson of the New York Times asked the bloggers in the room: “do people realize how much it costs to maintain a news operation in Baghdad?” Dave Winer called that a “silly question.” There are bloggers in Baghdad, he said, and “that’s your competition.

頁26，廣告和新網路媒體：

What constitutes news, who decides what is news, what ends up being reported, and how it gets distributed – as these things change, the way advertising is handled also changes.

頁30，文字之外的多媒體 blogging 與著作權問題：

Session 6: Brendan Greeley: podcasting, credibility and non-text media

頁31，mobile phones 和 podcasting：

I(Rebecca MacKinnon) asked Any Carvin of the Digital Divide Network to talk more about the exciting possibilities of combining mobile phones and podcasting.

頁32，Jimmy Wales 和 Dan Gillmor 的 session。Jimmy Wales 談到 Wikinews 的狀況：

The day before the conference, Wikinews was at least 12 hours faster than any of the news agencies in breaking a story on demonstrations in Belize…. in countries where the mainstream media has little presence and to which little attention is generally paid, wikinews and its volunteers have, potentially, a very interesting role to play.

頁34，然後，Jimmy Wales 繼續說：

For now, Wikinews is doing very little original reporting – despite the recent Belize example. Most wikinews articles are based on the synthesis, checking, and triangulation of news coming from a number of sources.

頁36， Jay Rosen 在 “Issues of linking, attribution, verification, and permissions" 提到

Jay Rosen pointed out that the process of reducing raw information from “uncertainty” to certainty” – which used to happen through the work of journalists before their stories got published – is now taking place publicly, online. That is something that the public needs to understand.

頁38，Alex Jones 等於是回答了 Chiao 在 Blog2005 聚會前一些媒體記者的提問：

In his concluding remarks, Alex Jones said he had learned, among other things, that the act of “blogging” means a wide range of different things to different bloggers –and what’s more, that different bloggers use the blog format to different ends.

頁38，Jonathan Zittrain 的看法。TWNIC應該會有興趣：

Jonathan Zittrain believes that for better or worse, “our view of intellectual property,” and how IP laws evolve over the coming years, will be very important to the way in which participatory media is able to evolve. The “underlying tension” remains: “how to create those structures that make that information happen and how to make people usefully be able to participate in it in a way that really works.”

頁39，剛好是在說 inertia 很久以前所提到的部落格反而更造成了數位落差的情境：

The danger is that the interests and voices of certain groups who are not participating in the online conversation will be excluded as much from the new conversation – or perhaps even more – than they were from the old.

頁40以後是 open session，有機會再寫。嗯，我們也非常需要一場類似的座談會。