So I’ve been hearing non-stop that Newspapers and Magazines are dying at a fantastic rate, despite having a higher readership among readers, especially young adults, than ever. The problem is that the internet is serving the content, which is then aggregated and served ad-revenue-free to readers. No revenue means no more quality journalism, and all your journalistic needs will be found through cell-phone captures and amateur bloggers. With the change of the medium, the message seems to have been released into the territory of ‘free.’ This is bad, not because blogging journalists are bad – they serve their grassroots purpose, most notably to serve up the important issues to the journalists and to keep them honest, but because journalistic expertise is at stake.
Not everyone is a coherent writer, let alone a good one. Not everyone knows how to get to the story, let alone the story behind the story. Not everyone has the desire to research issue to which they are writing, let alone research an issue or a problem for longer than a google search. Journalism has been around since the reign of Julius Caesar (the Acta Diurna); should a profession that has served the masses for over 2000 years go to the wayside because we don’t feel like paying for it anymore?
Sadly, as much as we’d love to have all free content all the time, we have to pay our journalists. They are various models we could go with on this one: micro-payments on articles (lame) premium content (better), or (as suggested by Jon Stewart) aggregator licensing (best). I’m sure there are others, but I hope that whatever model is used, that it is used to save this industry.
WK
This entry was written by , posted on February 16, 2009 at 10:16 am, filed under Internet and tagged Internet, journalism, Web 2.0. Leave a comment or view the discussion at the permalink.
If you look to your right, you’ll see a little box that has one or two sentences in it. This is called Twitter, the most popular micro-blogging tool on the internets. That’s right, micro-blogging: the current apex of internet nerditry!
Micro-blogging consists of 140-characters-at-a-time-or-less posts that talk about anything: what you are doing, what you are thinking, answers to others, links, and anything else that can be fit into 140 characters. For those on facebook, it’s basically updating only a facebook status all the freaking time. And then, you follow others’ feeds.
It’s great, and since I got my new iPod Touch (with its bountiful wifi access) from my wife, I use it in excess.
You should too. my twitter page is http://www.twitter.com/wkinchlea. Get jacked in. JOIN US.
WK
This entry was written by , posted on February 4, 2009 at 3:53 pm, filed under Blog, Internet, Web 2.0 and tagged Blog, Internet, Web 2.0. Leave a comment or view the discussion at the permalink.
(Originally Published April 21, 2006 on http://www.wkinchlea.blogspot.com)
After strolling around on the internet the other day, I found myself upon the Web 2.0 Bullshit Generator.
Some of my regular readers (and by some I mean the vast majority) have no idea what Web 2.0 is, and for the matter at hand, that’s ok. The point is, I found it funny, and I thought others would too.
So I emailed the Tall Skinny Kiwi, thinking he would get a kick out of it, too (he does know what Web 2.0 is). A week later, I get an email saying he enjoyed it as well and thought there should be one for the Emerging Church too. (Y’know, lighten the atmosphere, add some humour….for kicks) He then asked me to see if I couldn’t hack it and come up with my own.
Having never touched Javascript before, naturally I said “why not?”, and began to reverse engineer the website to create The Emerging Church Vision Generator. Originally, I had just sent Mr. Jones the html file for his own amusement and usage, (I didn’t have my own extra website hanging around) but I got impatient and decided to publish it for free at Bravenet.
For those at all involved with talking about Emerging Church junk, I hope you find this funny!
This entry was written by , posted on April 8, 2008 at 3:08 am, filed under Church, Humour, Internet and tagged Church, Emerging, Humour, Vision, Web 2.0. Leave a comment or view the discussion at the permalink.
(Originally published in the Canon25, Spring 2007)
I love the internet. I remember the first time I was on the internet. I was in the fifth grade and I was waiting in my mother’s office at the local public library and she quickly showed me how to search on Yahoo (www.yahoo.com). I spent the next 2 hours looking up articles and homepages on Super Mario Bros. and Reboot, an old cartoon. After that, I fell in love with what is now known as Web 1.0.
Didn’t know that the world-wide web is known as Web 1.0? Well, technically, it’s not, but its important to know that the web that I surfed on when I was ten is no longer the same organism that once was. Originally, through hypertext documents [ ".html"s, as it were], the content and the form of the internet was the same. Everything that you saw on the screen was part of one document, wholly separate from everything else and easily separated from other, similar documents. Essentially, what you saw in the ‘code’ of the page is what you saw in your web browser. You saw what I wanted you to see through the content I’ve inputed into the form.
This, however, has changed as Web 2.0 emerges on the horizon. With an allusion to software upgrades, people are beginning to see the Web as something new; something that has, in a sense, evolved. Over the last ten years, developers and coders have been creating new ways to view hypertext. In fact, according to the World-Wide Web Consortium, we are now using Hypertext 4.0 – but that’s an aside; more importantly we are beginning to see the fruits of ten years’ labour in Web 2.0.
The crux of Web 2.0 is that content has now been separated from form. What does this mean? It means that content no longer has to be written into the code of the page. What you see in the code is no longer what you have to see on the screen. Hypertext has now become only the framework of what the coder wishes, they no longer have to be the author. Authorship has been moved from coder to viewer. The viewers and users of the sites are now the creators of content.
This is nothing particularly new for most people our age – we’ve been part of Web 2.0 since its inception and are the strongest contributors. For examples of Web 2.0, think of social networks like Facebook (www.facebook.com), artistic content contributor sites like DeviantArt (www.deviantart.com) or even simply blogs like those found on Google’s own Blogger (www.blogger.com). But how does this change interaction with others?
Message boards and wholly web-created communities are no longer just for geeks. It is quite possible to be a ‘real person’ in the ‘real-world’ and create online friendships. I’ve been blessed with such a community, The Block (www.theblock.us). Originally, the members of the block met on the message board of L.A. Symphony and after being repeatedly asked to talk more about the group (whose musical prowess seemed to be declining at an alarming rate) we set off on our own and created our own space. After some four or five shifts in site and management, we now stand as a independent community whose members have only The Block as their connection.
The Block is community whose individuals comprise most walks of life [though they generally are Gen X'ers or Echo generation in age] and seek to support one another as best they can. While not explicitly Christian in nature, The vision of The Block is to be an online community, set to encourage one another in their daily lives and give them an open and safe forum with which to discuss pretty much whatever they want. I encourage you to come and join us sometime.
The reason I bring this up is because I have had many important and lasting relationships stem from my time at The Block. Flesh-and-Blood communities are no longer the only way to be supported in our shrinking world of rising communication. While some Blockheads [to coin a term] have met at least some others through an annual meeting, many remain only a screen name and a picture. This hasn’t stopped us from helping each other through relationship issues, financial problems, spiritual problems, easing others through the maturation process – basically everything a ‘brick-and mortar’ community would do for each other.
Essentially, what I’m getting at is that with the advent of user-driven content inherent in Web 2.0, community and communication are being redefined. The internet is moving beyond its information-driven origins – it’s becoming the world’s community– and I invite you to join. – WK
This entry was written by , posted on March 31, 2008 at 5:03 am, filed under Essays, Internet and tagged Essays, Internet, theblock.us, Web 2.0. Leave a comment or view the discussion at the permalink.