Out On The Stoop is my exploration about things to know, talk about or experience these amazing times. The Stoop mantra is Think, think, it ain't illegal yet.
I went to a convention. I had a little time so I walked around the neighborhood of the hotel.
This is what I saw:
Old school newsstands were wooden and filled with magazines and newspapers. Maybe some chewing gum to help you break a dollar for the bus.
If you wanted to know who got whacked or the story of the day you either went to a grocer, a box or a newstand.
And this is what it is now, one or two copies of the Daily News and Inquirer.
I felt bad.
Like a ghost passing through time.
But where do I get my news?
Where I live there are no newstands. Almost all of the news boxes are gone. There are some retail places that sell the Sunday papers. Places I rarely shop or visit.
I subscribe to one newspaper online but have to remember that I do have a subscription. It is my friends and relations that alert me to new stories that I check out.
Yet, something indeed has been lost. The solitude of reading at your own pace and reflecting on a story.
Robert Scheer knows a lot of people. Some of the people he mentions in this clip recorded at the Media Makers 99% Summit I haven't a strong connection as to who they are or were. Lots of history gets lost that way.
I have heard of Paul Krassner but not to clear on the details. The good news is that I should probably find out why this man is important or at least why does Scheer think so.
For more information about Robert Scheer you can check out www.truthdig.com.
I got your most recent e-mail. Yes, I have cut back on traipsing around your web site. I know that I have 20 free visits. I appreciate that, I do. My friends, relations and colleagues keep sending me NYT links trying to get me to go check out a news story on your site.
I slip up now and again. Yet, like the song lyric says, I'm trying to walk away from a love.
You see, I don't like being made to feel like I am a poacher. I'm not. When you had open access to the Times I'd step in to read an article, find a source to cite or get lost in the photo slide shows from the magazine or your photographers and journalists media projects.
Actually it was Bitman that lured me to the web site and next thing I'd know I am exploring the photo essays. The videos of AO, JD and Sam were growing on me. It wasn't like I'd keep it to myself, I did communicate with other folks who also checked out the site.
And the old school NYT Archives?; totally faboo. Love it and might have mentioned it to a few library folks. I will try to curtail that in the future. I like archive digging but that also eats into the 20 visits per month.
So why haven't I been back?
First of all, this Internet thing does cost me money. I have to pay for the phone lines, the DSL connection and related charges. So do you plus an infrastructure I don't have to carry.
I know it takes cash money to produce a newspaper. Your newspaper is worth it but dang if I can abide or cypher your pricing schemes.
Dude/Dudette, it makes no sense.
$799 for total paper and digital access per year $499 for digital only access for a year via smart phones and my desktop $385 for actual weekday paper and all digital access for a year $390 for Sunday only paper and all digital access for a year $220 for Kindle only access per year $195 for Web only (desktop) access $19.99 for a monthly Kindle only access $0.99 cents a daily Kindle issue $1.75 to $2 for the print newspaper, depending on where I bought it.
If I just look at it from a Kindle point of view, I'm not paying $19.99 a month to read the NYT on an six inch e-reader. I just figured out Article Mode but that only works for the text stories. The other features I like are not going to be accessible on an e-ink Kindle or my cheap smartphone because that would be a separate subscription.
I might splurge 99 cents on a day paper purchase but do I get to keep the day or does it disappear at midnight?
Once every other week I do buy the a paper edition. I get to hang on to it and read as much of it as I can. It takes a while.
You see my problem?
It's not you. It is me.
I'm not paying three separate subscriptions.
I don't want the paper version more than once a week. I don't want to start tracking how many times I've been to the site and I don't want to see that little tag that says I have four visits left.
I'm not a poacher, as many current and ex-journalists have cast web visitors like myself. Some of them even work for your newspaper. They should know better than to refer to visitors as poachers.
If they feel that way about it I don't have to come to the New York Times.
I think it is time for a trial separation. I've been looking around. I've even voluntarily gone to, you know, the Los Angeles Times web site.
Sigh, I know.
It's not the same but I need time to think. I'll let you know.
I made a mistake yesterday in that my rant about my feelings about bloggers and journalism should have been in a separate post from the actual recording. So I'm just going to err on the side of caution and just let the video speak for itself.
This is the second video of my recording of Andre Coleman's talk at the 2011 Citizen Journalism Speaker Series. Andre Coleman is a reporter/journalist with the Pasadena Weekly.
There are things I agree with Mr. Coleman and things I don't. The truth is I have to acknowledge that I have very strong feelings about newspapers, journalism and blogging.
I invested a lot of nickles, dimes and quarters in purchasing newspapers. I've invest a lot of time participating in blogging and community building. Which is why I have said and continue to say I'm not a journalist.
Unless I record that once in a lifetime video in which case "Yes, I am and pay me."
One of these days maybe I'll whip up a post on the 10 Things Journalists Need to Get Straight About Bloggers and New Media. I'll be able to write that post once I finish removing a number of bias cut logs in my eyes.
Update April 5, 8:29PM - Folks I need to make it clear that I made a mistake in not separating my remarks from Mr. Colman's video. Unlike Dogbert's pappy, I do not take down posts once I've written and published them. There was a better way to write this post.
In hindsight, you should have seen what I ditched. Never tweet when angry and never post when your fingers are moving faster than your brain.
Original Post
I am a blogger. I am also a writer. I do a lot of stuff actually so I really don't like labels. But let's say for the moment that I am a blogger. I have to say I'm a little touchy about current blogger/journalist relations.
They suck.
I have had a few days to think about the citizen journalism session. The Pasadena Community Network has weekly meetings on Tuesday nights. The focus of the meetings is to develop journalism skills that can be applied to blogs, web sites, mimeograph reporting or how ever you want to do it.
There is also the Pasadenan which is also citizen driven content with an editor and staff moderating the content. That is cool. Works for me. I have no objection to anyone development better writing or reporting skills.
It is getting better but there is a long road to the junction of peace. This is reporter Andre Coleman speaking at the March 29, 2011 Citizen Journalism Speaker Series that was held at the main branch of the Pasadena Library. Mr. Coleman write for the Pasadena Weekly.
My Thoughts
First of all I support anything a person can do to make their writing better. Many bloggers take workshops, online classes and actively work on developing their skills. I am not a journalist but I do make use of some of the classes and webinars at Poynter's NewsU. Special shout out at the great tutorials at the Knight Digital Media Center.
Good writing and reporting transcend labels.
I do not hate reporters and good journalists. I was raised in a newspaper town with two major newspapers and six or seven alternative newspapers. It truly saddens me that we have lost a huge chunk of the respect and the importance we use to hold for newspapers in this country.
I have people around me that use that term blogger as a pejorative. (Not referring to Andre Coleman. I have other real world examples that like to point with pride the ink in their veins.)
Many of these people are ex-reporters, current reporters and soon to be ex-reporters that do not apply their training to find out what is happening with contemporary bloggers and technology.
You want to lump me in with the fat guy sitting naked at his keyboard? Go for it. That just shows ignorance. That is not a good thing for journalists to display but if that is what you want to do why should I stand in your way? But I am not the one that put the shiv in the back of newspapers.
Newspaper management did it to themselves.
Newspapers in the 1980s and 90s did not want to pay attention to people outside of their chosen proven money demographic. They did not court the next generation. They totally did not get the beginnings of early on-line communities or the Internet.
If you do not talk to me or connect with me in some way why should I buy your product or service?
Some of the current silly rabbits in newspaper management and related media companies think all they have to do is take a person previously known columnist and change the word to blogger and then people will come a running back.
Many in the industry blame bloggers for stealing content from their newspapers yet provide links to stories and want people to tweet the news story. However they don't want others to summarize or add additional context to a news story that omitted an important perspective.
News management wants bloggers to promote newspapers but you don't want us reading your content.
My admittedly limited understanding of the corporate news management perspective is that I should pay for content I do not read or cannot use, such as sports, that I should be grateful that said content exists and that I should not want or need to have any further communication with those that generate said content.
Oh, and don't tell anybody else where I found the content that does not interest me on account they might read it too.
Tell me again why I want to have a relationship with newspapers?
The term citizen journalism is often used as a pejorative by mainstream media unless those same citizens make it easier for mainstream and corporate journalist folks to whip up a quick story.
Just got an e-mail that Andrea Coleman of the Pasadena Weekly will be having a discussion about citizen on March 29, 2011 in the Donald R. Wright Auditorium at the Pasadena Central Library. 285 E. Walnut St., in Pasadena starting at 6:00pm.
I happen to think the term is more expansive than the professionals give credit and most times they don't or they are dressed up in carpet bagging clothing. Yes, I have biases and opinions which is not the same as reporting and journalism.
I am a blogger, not a journalist but I have friends all over the joint. If I can find my camcorder and find a way to get home back I'll try to make it but no promises.
I've been burned before by these type of events. I hope it is really is a discussion and not folks betting up on bloggers, non-corporate reporters and independent story tellers.
I'll need 24 more hours to improve my mood anyway.
My initial answer is usually “No.” In my head a so-called “chick flick” is fluffy, superficial and it reeks of girly-girl craziness in pursuit of beefcake. Or so I have been told. If I dig a little deeper inside of myself I think “How do I know this?” Well, movie reviewers and critics, mostly male but some female critics have passively taught me the negative confines of a chick flick. So I wonder, do women see movies differently than men?
Cinema Studies is many things from how each element in a film contributes to the creation of an movie experience to the importance of a film against the context of its time. Let me start with an movie that I was guilty of pre-judging when I saw the initial ads and reviews.
The Notebook is based on the novel by Nicholas Sparks. Had no prior knowledge of Mr. Sparks work. I might have seen the commercials for the movie and read a few of the reviews. It was enough to cause me to dismiss spending money on the film. That was a mistake. This is the trailer for the film:
About a year ago I saw the movie on television. Loved it. I couldn’t figure out how I had missed it. Looking back at the reviews I can see why. I was told that it was sweet, corny and well worth the risk of diabetic shock? Yowser!
I found that the movie invited me into the past and the present with a love story involving class, wealth, loss and the endurance of love. The same qualities that I found in Casablanca, The Quiet Man and What Dreams May Come. For me, it was the story and the craftsmanship used to tell the story. If the movie touched me in a positive way but freaked out some of the men that reviewed it does that make it a bad movie?
It could be that, to a professional movie reviewer who has seen a lot of movies, this was a paint by the numbers job. For myself who spent umpteen years watching the Late, Late Show and knows a turkey movie when I see one, I don’t think this was the case. How many good films might have been ignored because they didn’t resonate with the perceptions of the predominately male reviewers? I don’t know. I don’t even know if it is a fair question.
If, on the other hand, watching the movie makes you feel bad about your love life (or lack thereof) is it a good movie because it re-enforces cultural memes about finding true, everlasting love? Shannon at Three Girls Grown Up pulled a double whammy on herself. She read the book and viewed the movie.
So there is the subjective way to view film and an objective way to see a film. For students learning filmmaking there is process you can employ to really understand how the film was crafted. Tendrape at the Communications and Culture Blog reviewed the film looking at how certain decisions were made to invoke mood and experience. She also looked at how certain mythologies are conveyed in the film:
This movie reinforces attitudes that go along with other popular films today like encouragement for the underdog and living the American Dream. Even though Noah is not working to become a millionaire or something with money which most often is associated with the American Dream, he doesn’t stop trying to get Allie back and eventually all his enduring efforts paid off similar to the dreams goals panning out in the end.
Women who love film/cinema/movies might bring a different perspective on what the see in a movie. They can also shine a light on forgotten or ignored film history. Here are some examples.
Other Cinema Blogs That Inform
Stacia at She Blogged By Night gives a review and critique of BorderTown. Stacia intertwines a synopsis of the movie with how Bette Davis performance in the film enhances or detracts from the presentation. There is also a mention of the racism directed toward Latinos in the 1930s in the film. Raquelle from Out Of The Past, A Classic Film Blog uses the 1961 movie, The Young Savages to focus in on how Puerto Ricans are portrayed in New York City, 30 years away from BorderTown.
Raquelle has another great post about the dilemma of just focusing on the film or performance or do you allow the actor’s real life to influence your appreciation of the film:
I am far too nosy and inquisitive to not learn about the lives of classic film stars yet is it right for me to dig up the dirt? Should I honor their legendary careers by avoiding their personal lives? If so, why should I? If they did bad things, why should I overlook them? What about those stars who were genuinely good people? Should we avoid them too?
Campaspe at Self-Style Siren evaluates the screen relationships between two great character actors, Peter Lorre and Sydney Greenstreet. She point out an interesting aspect of one of their scenes in The Maltese Falcon:
How well these two always managed to flesh out relationships that were somewhat superficial on paper. In The Maltese Falcon their more-than-business association is startlingly plain, but it's all in the playing. When Lorre attacks Greenstreet, yelling "You, you imbecile! You bloated idiot! You stupid fathead!" we hear not just a criminal sidekick but also a frustrated ex-lover.
Lolita’s Classics features a tribute to Animator Lottie Reiniger. Reiniger used black paper and scissors to create her animations and the work is stunning. You can view some of Lottie’s wonderful videos at Lolita’s blog. As Lolita points out:
Even though many people think that the first feature-length animated film was Walt Disney's Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937), The Adventures of Prince Achmed really is the oldest surviving animated feature film.
Bunny Fontaine loves B-Movies and writes about them at The B-Movie Buffet. But Bunny also grooves on retro movie fashions at her blog The Jaded Pussycat. Check out the 1960s fashions from the Dean Martin film The Silencers and then wonder about the so-called good old days when things were more “innocent.”
Sometimes a film can inspire folks to create their own works of art. Diane at Whidbey Island pays tribute to Hollywood fashion via reconstructing costumes from movies. The costumes are scaled to doll size. You can see costumes from Imitation of Life, Funny Face and Rear Window.
I end with Norma Desmond’s The Flick Chick review of a contemporary movie, My Life in Ruins. From what I’ve read this may indeed be a chick flick and not a good one at that:
I can’t remember the last time I saw a film where the plot machinery was so clearly visible and where everyone involved seemed to be proceeding with a “let’s just get this over with” attitude. I wasn’t even expecting that much from this, just light, fluffy summer entertainment but I find it difficult to be entertained by things that never aspire to more than the lowest common denominator.
I think the difference for me is that the plot and structure of the movie is being judged and not the fact that it doesn’t have bombs, gore or transforming robots as an instant negative.
This post originally appeared on BlogHer, where I am a Contributing Editor.
Low life scumbags have been stealing blog posts for a long time. I remember finding one of my videos surrounded by ads for a violent movie. Thing was I think I had recorded a peace march. You think that advertiser got his money’s worth?
When I e-mailed the person asking him to take down my video he replied that since he was outside of the U.S. American laws didn’t apply to him. It was on the Internet and it was free so why should I be upset? Since he had ripped off a number of people eventually he was convinced of the error of his ways.
By the way, if you are reading this entire post inside of another blog that isn’t on BlogHer or Out On The Stoop and there are advertisements around the post you should know that it is straight up theft. What got me started on this post was that I can’t stop thinking about J.D.’s post over at Get Rich Slowly on How Much Money Would It Take for You to Compromise Your Principles? What is fascinating to me is that there were people who honestly did not see a problem of posting without disclosure of a post being an advertorial. They would have taken the money and not blinked an eye.
When I use a term like low life scumbags it is because some foul lump of meat is ripping off post from the blog Mother’s with Cancer and presenting it as their own work. There are other words I would like to use.
Ethics, people! We have to have ethics or as Crosby Stills & Nash taught us, “You, who are on the road, must have a code that you can live by. And so, become yourself, because the past, is just a goodbye.” If you don’t want you visitors leave you in the dust you need to brush up on matter of ethics.
What Are Ethics?
I started out looking for a definition of ethics. There isn’t just one. It does depend on who you ask. I started with Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
The field of ethics, also called moral philosophy, involves systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong behavior.
I tried the dictionary approach: the philosophical study of moral values and rules. Ok so ethics is the study of morals? What are morals? Motivation based on ideas of right and wrong. I swing back over to another philosophy encyclopedia at Stanford University and they have over 601 sub-sections on every kind of ethics imaginable.
Thank goodness for the BBC. They actually have a very clear understandable seven page section on What Is Ethics? for their Region and Ethics portal site:
Ethics is a branch of philosophy that covers a whole family of things that have a real importance in everyday life.
Ethics is about right and wrong
Ethics is about rights and duties
Ethics is about good and bad
Ethics is about what goodness itself is…
My understanding of ethics is the instructional code that is placed inside of you by your parents, culture, environment and dozens of other societal reference points that help you make good or bad decisions. As an added bonus your emotions, wants and needs play a substantial part in creating your code.
As we get older and join different communities and cultures, that code of right and wrong gets tested, altered and sometimes quietly smashed for the sake of a greater payoff/reward. However if there is core foundation of “ethics” of what is or isn’t the right thing to do then you might not be swayed so quickly to the dark side.
Ethics in Blogging Past and Present
In 2002 Rebecca Blood of Rebecca’s Pocket wrote one of the first posts on blogger ethics. Although others certainly have written about blogging ethics and have attempted to set up a blogging code of honor this was a thoughtful attempt to help bloggers do the right thing.
Later in 2003 CyberJounalists.net also tried to quantify ethical blogging behavior:
Bloggers should be honest and fair in gathering, reporting and interpreting information. Bloggers should: • Never plagiarize. • Identify and link to sources whenever feasible. The public is entitled to as much information as possible on sources' reliability. • Make certain that Weblog entries, quotations, headlines, photos and all other content do not misrepresent. They should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context.
I am not a journalist, I am a writer and blogger. But there is some overlap in terms of being responsible, honest and transparent. The Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) has its own Code of Ethics that I learned about in a seminar held by the SPJ in June of 2008. It was a bridge and an opportunity for journalists to share what works and what bloggers should be aware of when blogging in public:
Never plagiarize. (You really can’t say that one enough, don’t steal other people’s work.) — Tell the story of the diversity and magnitude of the human experience boldly, even when it is unpopular to do so. — Examine their own cultural values and avoid imposing those values on others. — Avoid stereotyping by race, gender, age, religion, ethnicity, geography, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance or social status. — Support the open exchange of views, even views they find repugnant. — Give voice to the voiceless; official and unofficial sources of information can be equally valid.
Kate Trgovac at My Name is Kate clearly states what she will do and what she expects from visitors. Kate does tell you that she is a marketer and understands the needs of both sides but that does not mean you get to run a game on her:
This is my blog. I write about stuff that interests me. Sometimes that includes my clients. And sometimes that includes stuff that has been sent to me for free as a review or evaluation copy.
I will ALWAYS disclose if I am blogging about a client. I will ALWAYS disclose if I have received a product for free.
Some bloggers like Karen at Good Dog Owners vs. Bad Dog Laws keeps her ethics simple, she will not disrespect people, period.
So, in conclusion, I would suggest that you start thinking about what you would and would not do in regards to your blog. There is no one answer but there are things that are flat out wrong. If you have questions drop them in the comment section.
This post originally appeared on BlogHer where I am a Contributing Editor.
Take a look at this video from Talking Points Memo about an off camera moment with a few pundits, one of which is Peggy Noonan.
I found out about from Daily Kos where you can read a transcript of what she and the other fella said. The Huffington Report also has a transcript as well.
Flashback 2004
In 2004 there were four of us at the bus stop. Two young black men and a lady named Queen. We started talking about the election. The two young men said they were not going to vote.
We asked why would you risk a second term? They felt that did not have anything more to lose. The first election was tricked, and nothing in that administration concerned them or had an impact on their lives. "They were gonna steal this one to so what was the point of getting worked up?"
Queen and I tried to convince them otherwise. We brought up history (not slavery, there is far more to African American history and culture than slavery). We brought up the ancestors who died for their right to vote. We said you can't allow that administration to remain in office; you don't know what mess is coming down the road. This is an opportunity.
They did not care. They were thinking about moving to South Africa. What did America have to do with them anyway? It got hot and highly verbal. Eventually both side understood each others view. We left it peaceful. We were civil. Then the bus came.
The election came and went. Then the war. Then Katrina, the budget and the systematic removal of civil liberties and rights.
Back To Present Time
Peggy Noonan believed what she said off-mike. But earlier in the day she wrote something else, that she likes and supports Palin. And later in the day Peggy wrote a clarification and an apology for using the word "bullsh*t and how her words and intent were misinterpreted. and she didn't mean to imply that the campaign is over. That was not her stated intent.
Peggy also wrote this:
The mainstream media, which has been holding endless symposia here on the future of media in the 21st century, is in danger of missing a central fact of that future: If they appear, once again, as they have in the past, to be people not reporting the battle but engaged in the battle, if they allow themselves to be tagged by that old tag, which so tarnished them in the past, they will do more to imperil their own future than the Internet has.
This is true: fact is king. Information is king. Great reporting is what every honest person wants now, it's the one ironic thing we have less of in journalism than we need. But reporting that carries an agenda, that carries Bubblehead assumptions and puts them forth as obvious truths? Well, some people want that. But if I were doing a business model for broadsheets and broadcast networks I'd say: Fact and data are our product, we're putting everything into reporting, that's what we're selling, interpretation is the reader's job, and think pieces are for the edit page where we put the hardy, blabby hacks".
I don't disagree with that. I wish it was true. Except the hardy blabby hacks are on radio and television too and no one is able to distinguish, comedian from pundit from newsman from former White House official.
Why should I believe anything anymore from any outlet of M$M? Doesn't matter the political party. The mirror has two faces. It seems that only if you are with the cognoscenti do you have access to the truth.
I love good reporting. It is necessary in a democracy. And on the surface political discussions are almost a birthright. But what is going on right now? Geez, I wish the hell I knew.
Here is another example when citizen journalism, library issues and blogging collide. At the ALA conference Nolo Press had a table of books. It was love at first sight. I wanted to buy those books. I couldn't, they were just sample copies. Drat!
One of books was Getting Permission by Attorney Richard Stim. On the Nolo web site it has a brief overview page of the concept of Fair Use . If you wanted more info about the book they just happen to have a link at the bottom of the page. The pulp version has a CD that contains copies of forms and permission sheets you can use to request permission from copyright holders.
If you don't need the forms you can save yourself some cash and buy the e-book version for $20.
Nolo Press also has a book on The Public Domain where you can get the straight scoop on what is and isn't in the Public Domain and how to find out if a work has slipped out of copyright status.
If you want to hear attorney Stephen Fishman talk about the book and Public Domain issues you can stream or download the mp3 file. The e-book version of the books is $21.99
Ok, still unpacking both physically and mentally. More to come.
So, there are some writers and journalists that really hate blogs? I'm shocked, shocked. I'm temporarily violating my promise of not writing about sports because I really don't know anything I could write or contribute about the topic.
I have never been invited to participate in sports and from all of the cultural messages I get professional and amateur sports has got no use for me either. Fair enough. But diss blogging? Now you are in my neck of the woods.
Look, I understand the guy's frustration. I hate going to crappy blogs. Just as I hate wasting money on crappy articles, newspapers and magazines that are "phone it in reporting" and inaccurate. But just as I would not hold his writing in judgment because of the letters to the editor he might received he shouldn't hold a blogger totally accountable for the trolls and anonymous posters who will say anything to get a rise out of someone.
Hey, they have phone screeners at talk radio stations, right? Isn't there a seven second delay on live television shows. So I should blame the shows for an occasional idiot who gets through?
In blogging as in print media there is a spectrum of publications. I don't buy the National Inquirer. Some folks do. I buy computer magazines, some folks don't. I don't lump all print media as being the same and I wish to hell that journalists/television news performers would learn to do the same.
Buzz, baby bust out of L7. Find you a sport person you trust that can lead you to the quality sports blogs that have good reporting, civil comments and a fair exchange between writers and participants.
Or stay off of the Internet, seriously. Don't stress yourself out and get all worked up over something you don't understand or respect. Stick with print, it's working for you, you seem to have a lot of readers who like your work.
I want to let folks know that there are some opportunities for citizen journalism training that are happening around the country. The Society of Professional Journalists is having, I guess you could call them, workshops/seminars in how to use journalism techniques in blogs and vlogs.
The price is right and the topics are timely such as (from the web site) :
Journalism ethics. The new-media landscape is rife with dilemmas for anyone wanting to report accurately, fairly and outside the bounds of special interests.
The basics of media law. The same longstanding laws concerning libel, slander and access to people and information apply to 21st-century news-gatherers.
Access to pubic records and meetings. Public information can add substance and value to every news story. But knowing where to look for it can be tough.
If I can swing it I think I will attend. I'm pretty sure the conversation will be from the top down but I do think there are some intersections between journalists and bloggers that are common ground. Finding information, being accurate in what you write and being transparent. We want the same things. Honest, we do.
But I don't want "journalists" telling me that they are more legit than a good blogger who does his/her homework. Not after the boners that are spilling out from the professional side of the fence. Don't make me recite the long list of hack jobs like the L.A. Times and Sean Combs, that so-called debate with ABC's Gibson and Stephanopoulos, or the lack of questioning of those "military advisers" who all said the same thing at the same time. Y'all got played big time on that one.
One of the reason I get charged up about videoblogging and citizen journalism is that you get normal people recording amazing pieces of work. One such example is Alive in Baghdad. Curfew Video From Alive in Baghdad
This is your chance to step away from what you see on TV and view what they are experiencing. It might shake your preconcieved notions. Folks in Iraq might be just like us.
There is news, links to Iraqi blogs and videos of life after liberation or occupation. http://www.aliveinbaghdad.org
Update 7/24/06 This is a link to the press conference Josh gave after meeting with the Feds. He is due back in court on August 1, 2006. Click to view the QuickTime Video
On July 20, 2005 they are hosting Josh up on civil contemp charges for invoking his:
1st Amendment ...or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press...
4th Amendment ...right of people to be secure in their persons, house, papers and effects, against unreasonable seraches and seizures
5th Amendment ...nor should any person be subject for the same offence
6th Amendment ...and to be informed of the nature and cause for the accusation
and 14th Amendment ...without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
The short version: Local community college newspaper runs a story about student depression and suicide. The larger story is about the connection between pressures students face and depression. It mentions as an example two students, one specifically named, who committed suicide.
The paper goes to press, issues are printed and distributed on campus. The papers are gone the next day. More papers are distributed. They are removed. This is where they wound up. The dumpster.
Who placed the issues in the dumpster? Was it the campus police?
Why did administration ask for the story to be removed from the student newspaper web site?
Why am I telling you this?
Because a story has been suppressed. Newspapers destroyed. A writer's voice silenced. Fear vomited on the First Amendment to the Constitution. What good is the name and the reputation of the school if it does not stand up for what is right?
Does it matter it happened on a community college level? Yes, it does. This kind of thing can get to be a habit if not caught in time. Contagious because others may think this is the thing to do when you don't like what is being said about you, your workplace, your city, state and dare I say it, federal government.
If you know a teen or college person take them for a long walk, have them turn off the cell phone and start talking about the process of making healthy mental choices. Talk about coping skills that don't involve alcohol, really nasty chemicals or burning dead grasses. Listening is good too.
Because, that really was the point of the article.
....this just in from VlogWitness News (er, via the SF Chronicle, this is just an excerpt). No telling if the Feds or FBI are going to start the process over again but I'm real glad he isn't going to be wearing an orange jumper.
SAN FRANCISCO Journalist not forced to give up video Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday, June 16, 2006
Printable Version Email This Article A freelance journalist who faced a possible jail sentence for refusing to surrender video footage of a July 2005 clash between San Francisco police and anarchist demonstrators was abruptly released from a subpoena by federal prosecutors Thursday, his lawyer said.
Josh Wolf, 24, was ordered by U.S. District Judge William Alsup in a closed-door hearing earlier in the day to turn over the video and answer questions before a federal grand jury investigating the alleged vandalism of a police car, said attorney Ben Rosenfeld. Rosenfeld said Wolf was then questioned before the grand jury, and he insisted that he had a constitutional right to remain silent and to discuss the questions with his lawyers, and finally was told by a prosecutor, without explanation, that he was free to go.
There was no comment from the U.S. attorney's office. ********************* Original Post
This is important, this is urgent. The following post has been copied from the Yahoo Videobloggers Group. One of our own, our kinfolk is about to go to jail because he recorded an event. He is facing contemp of court charges. The feds are bearing down on him and he is not a mainstream media, just a man on purpose and standing by his truth.
You want reality, here it is... this young man is might to go to jail because he is invoking his rights. As a videoblogger, reporter, documentarian he is facing potential jail. Read this, pass it on, visit his site and above all else kick up a fuss because if the come for Josh they will be coming for me week after next and somebody you know a month from now.
Hi, some of you at vloggercon probably saw my presentation/plea for help in publicizing my case involving the federal grand jury who has gone after my footage from a protest that I as a vlog journalist captured in the city of San Francisco on July 8th of 2005.
In February I was subpoenaed by the Federal Grand Jury and commanded to testify and provide my footage from protest that I filmed. This is in an illegal subpoena on several counts including the fact that as a journalist any subpoena needs to be approved by the US Attorney general and it was not. This act by the federal government is an attempt to trump the state protections afforded by journalists such as the California Shield Law which protects me from having to turn over unpublished material in order to preserve the trust relationship between journalists and their subjects.
The Assistant US Attorney has stated that this is a federal matter and thus not protected by the shield law as a San Francisco Police Vehicle was vandalized during the protest that I filmed and as the city receives money from the Federal Government, and some portion of the police car may have been paid for with federal funds, this is,therein, a federal matter. This assertion has huge ramifications for all journalists both independent and commercial in that it serves to erode all of the protections that journalists have managed to achieve at the state level. After all, to prove that federal money has some indirect role is a rather low barrier to trump these shield laws and the potentialities are absolutely terrifying.
After exhausting my appeals to quash this subpoena, I was served yesterday afternoon with a new order to appear this Thursday. After careful consideration, I have decided that it would go against my journalistic ethics to comply with the demands of the subpoena and will most likely be found in contempt of court for my non-cooperation sometime on Thursday. At that point in time, I will most likely be taken to jail while we continue to work on the appeals process.
The best tool available to me is that of trying to educate and influence the public opinion about my case, and that's why I am appealing to each of you to cover my situation on your blog or videoblog; the mainstream media does not appear to be all too interested in bringing this issue to light and it is up to us independent voices to help spread the word about my situation.
Beyond that, I think that encouraging people to contact the US Senators in California: Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinstein. My representative in the House: Nancy Pelosi. State Representative: Mark Leno. The Mayor: Gavin Newsom, the District Attorney Kamela Harris, and the San Francisco Board of Supervisors might help to put some political pressure on this situation and hopefully result in my campaign to protect my journalistic privilege and also lead towards me being released on my own recognizance during my appeal process to the 9th circuit court of appeals.
I am compiling as much information about my case as possible at a website that I have setup at http://joshwolf.net/grandjury/and the contact info for all of these politicians should be up there at some point by the end of the day.
If you are uncertain how you feel about this issue, or why am I choosing this course of action, please do not hesitate to contact me via e-mail or through the phone. I appreciate any support that you can provide and even if you don't feel comfortable addressing this issue publicly on your blog, a private e-mail would do much to help my well-being. Please do mention whether I can use your e-mail in the court as an example of public support for this issue.
Thanks for anything you are able to do, it really does mean a lot to me. This past weekend felt like a family reunion for a family I never knew I had. We really are a community and I hope to see this community help rally support when a member of that community, such as myself, is in trouble.
I met Tony at the L.A. Times Festival of Books gathering. On one of the pathways there were tables of people and causes. Most were asking for donations, support or just a pause long enough to give the speech. Tony belongs to the Los Angeles chapter of World Can't Wait - Los Angeles. They are planning a huge grassroots meeting on October 5, 2005.
This is the QuickTime Version. He had some interesting materials at his table so I ambled on over and starting talking. I did record a lot more video but I have to work out a way to record people who are taller than me.
I have trouble keeping their whole head in the frame. So a lot of our conversation I felt was not usable. I'm gonna have to start bring a step ladder or something.
I'm not the only vlogger who is trying to document the changes in our country and world. Randy Wicker is a man of many interests. He is interested in giving voice to a diverse population.
At the very least Randy gives me information I normally don't have easy access. This allows me to make up my own mind. That is the true spirit of democracy.
Is preventing conception murder? Randy has recorded a presentatation on how certain groups are trying to influence their beliefs on the pharmacy profession. If you have the time, check out his post where Marin Gillis, Ph.D explains about particular disinformation activites of the religious conservative right.
