Digital first if we really have to …

Dave Winer’s latest post, Online journalism remains unexplored, gets this right, I think.

We still tend to see the internet either as a place/space/platform where we can carry on doing whatever it is we’re doing, but just get it out there quicker and cheaper.

Money quote:

… for the most [journalists] have gone to the Internet with a feeling of necessity not wonder.

That said, he’s hard on journalists, whom he accuses almost of setting up roadblocks and checkpoints between the reader and the source.

Is that all we do – just get in the way? Does our disintermediation (his word) add no value to the reader at all?

Never mind the quality, feel the control

From one of our Getting started guides for new students:

There is a general problem with the Internet which you need to be aware of, namely that it is not subject to any kind of quality control.

Problem? Isn’t that the whole point of the internet?

Good tips
The practical tips in the guide are reasonable and relevant. They urge students to ask the right questions about the provenance and source of the information, and of the author, how topical it is, etc.

It’s the tone of the intro that bothers me.

As a general rule, I’d say that when it come to information, quality control is usually heavier on the control than on the quality.

And, to rework an old saying, the net interprets control as damage and routes around it.

Rules rule

Good post from Sue Watling on the perils of blogging the job.

This is something we all need guidance on. It goes to the heart of what this blogging system is for. I think, I’m sorry to say, that Sue was right to take the blog down. It’s not that blogging has rules. Work has rules. And those rules keep operating whatever the medium.

So…blog anonymously if you want to protect yourself – or your job.

Because – here’s the thing – bosses don’t blog.

And even if they did, they’d still be your boss.