Surviving WebZine 2005
Well, Day One is complete, and of the five presentations I saw, I'd say made two were worth about what we got.
First of all, I want to say thank you to the people that put on this shindig. You guys have made an incredibly accessible conference, on a shoestring budget, that comes out pretty well. You guys deserve props for what you've done. The following is some unfiltered thoughts on how it went down.
We arrived, picked up our wristbands and headed for the Freya room, with its vaulted ceiling, and spectacular Norse truss-work. The chairs for the panelists looked like they belonged in Valhalla, so perhaps when I was expecting more than just random babbling, I was setting the bar too high. The first panel was, in fact, a bust. Daniel Terdiman was the only one on stage who was an actual honest-to-Ned journalist, and the credentials others had included "Well, I was a journalist once" and "I'm a copy editor for the Contra Costa Times..." so really, I'm not sure that you talk too heavily about journalism. Terdiman was upset with this panel and it showed.
Next, I sat through what could possibly be the hardest to watch, yet most necessary, presentation. Jacob Appelbaum talked for an hour about what it was like to watch his heroin-addicted father die in San Francisco, give up on life and head to Iraq, then come back and head for Katrina-ravaged Louisiana. While I respect Jacob's daring and his humanity for doing what he did, I'm not sure I can share his perspective that those of us who go to a rock concert or an art gallery while there are starving people in the world who are being Held Down By The Man are immoral for doing so. However, his presentation has truly hit home with me, and I do sympathize with what he's had to go through over the past year or so.
After that we took a much needed walk over to Sparky's, so we missed that 2pm panels in favor of a good burger and a better milkshake. We got back in time to see half the porn panel, which while interesting, doesn't apply to me much. It was, however, interesting to hear people talk about the new 2257 codes and why they're a bit unrealistic. Hoping that this one gets struck down in court for stifling free enterprise.
What came next was Molly Golightly's discussion of self-marketing. While I found this one interesting, I thought that much of it was pretty well hard to swallow. If you believe in what you're doing, throwing yourself at every which person that comes at you saying "OMG, OMG read my blog!" isn't the way to go about it. But, applying for awards, doing all manner of stuff across genres and mentioning what else you do, that is important, so I will forgive Molly for actually using the word "interfacing" when she meant to say "talking with other people". Interfacing is for computers. Talking is for people.
The last session of the day was Phillip Torrone's session on the psyche of the makers, and that was the most rewarding session more about tech than society. Good content, encouragement to Make Stuff and cool t-shirts. What could go wrong? Then we went over to Lucky 13 for a couple of beers and I had the chance to buy Jason from Preshrunk a beer for his fine efforts in keeping geeks clothed, and of course hang out with Sean and Jason and Christiana and Jonas and the gang.
Later we headed deep in to SoMa for the official party and we apparently left before it got good, which is sad, but we were beat, having risen early to train into the city. Today we're headed back for day two, and talks by Sean and Jonas and Pud from FuckedCompany.com (now of AdBrite.com).
More as the day continues. Of course, there's always my Flickr Photostream.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341ca44053ef00e5503bd0638834
Levelling the Playing Field: Journalism Online at Webzine 2005
Today I moderated a panel I put together on journalism in our crazy, fast-paced, ultra-modern online world (or something like that) for Webzine. Nicole Lee, Daniel Terdiman, Adriel Hampton, Glenda Bautista and George Kelly answered my questions and...
Comments:
Thanks for weighing in, but I'd like to respectfully disagree that the panel was 'a bust.' While it's true that Daniel was the only person currently employed as a staff writer, the other panelists are very much professionals in the field of journalism. When George Kelly isn't working as an editor, he's an award-winning author of three blogs. Nicole Lee writes for Gizmodo and Wired magazine. Glenda Bautista works on the tech side of Knight-Ridder's online arm. And Adriel Hampton is an activist and blogger, and is using his investigative skills as a reporter in his job with the San Francisco City Attorney's office.
My goal wasn't just to present reporters, but to present people with perspective on how the industry is changing. We discussed the job market for journalists, which isn't good, and I think that's reflected in the makeup of the panel. Folks are turning to different careers and self-publishing because there just aren't as many staff writer positions around. The Chronicle, for instance, is busy buying out or laying off nearly 200 writers and editors on their staff.
Please feel free to get in touch if you have questions that you felt weren't addressed at the panel. I'm happy to continue the discussion.
Posted by jacksonwest on September 26, 2005 — 3:22 PM
Jackson, thanks for the comments, I'm glad you came by. However, I felt that the discussion wasn't of much interest to those of us bloggers who don't really see the "journalism" in most bloggers, nor your panel's contents (with the exception of Terdiman, and possibly the exception of Nicole and the gentleman who was once upon a time a journalist).
The web is a place where one can easily say something without repercussion, and generally without a great deal of responsibility, which makes "journalism" as we know it to be an absenteee parent from the blogosphere (oh how I loathe that word).
The downfall of Trent Lott and the retirement of Dan Rather aren't the signature of a dying medium, but rather, sign of a medium sick with bias and while the blogosphere is no neutral-tone-marketplace, it doesn't have to pretend to be. The agendas of the writers are clear from the start, as opposed to the mediasphere where we're supposed to be seeing impartial commentators and we're definitely not.
Why not talk about that?
It's no surprise the lumbering dinosaur of American Media is suffering at the box office and trying to reinvent themselves: they're so beyond their original mission of impartiality and such a slave to the subscriptions numbers that any and everything looks good to them, to the detriment of their mission.
Posted by Tom Bridge on September 26, 2005 — 9:58 PM