The Dirty Dozen

Kevin Z. Smith, deputy director of the Kiplinger Center for Public Affairs Journalism at Ohio State University details the Reporters Dirty Dozen Apps at JournCamp in NYC

 

 

     Ok, I'm going on record right now that I'm not going to use MapAList to create a chart of everyone I send a Christmas card to.

     And, yes, I still send Christmas cards. Not pre-printed even. And, I write notes. In pen. Cursive. Remember cursive?

      But a map? I mean, why?

     Nevertheless, it sounds like a cool app. For work. Not to create a detailed graphic of where my friends live. I know where my friends live. 

     MapAList is one of the Digital Dirty Dozen presented at JournCamp by Kevin Z. Smith, deputy director of the Kiplinger Center for Public Affairs Journalism at Ohio State University. And Smith showed a map of his boss's Christmas card list. Interesting.

     JournCamp features panels and programs for journalists from students to old pros. It is co-sponsored by Kiplinger and the Society of Professional Journalists. The June 13 JournCamp was held in mid-town Manhattan under the auspices of the Deadline Club, the NYC SPJ chapter. 

      New technologies pop up like dandelions and the Digital Dirty Dozen is a list of helpful apps.

And I thought this was high tech. . .

       All of the apps Smith outlined are helpful but not all are useful to everybody and not all of them are simple.

     Data.gov is a clearing house for most of the government's unclassified data. That's 113,000 data sets, or, as Smith quipped, "a black hole." But if you're looking for your grandmother's FBI file.

     Videolicious (I'm a little bit suspicious of apps that sound like they were named by Rachael Ray's dog) is a simple video editing app. Since the only video I've ever shot on my phone is of my friend Rebecca playing Ski-Ball after drinking two Bushwhackers (think a White Russian milkshake), I've not been tempted to use it.

Smith with his trusty laptop handy.

     Voddio is a professional-grade audio and video recorder for use on your phone or tablet. Vericorder even allows you to include background music (which might have been useful when a colleague of mine tried to record a show on Greenwood Lake when the big weed harvester passed right behind him). 

     ProCam8 is a mere $4.99 from iTunes and provides a seamless movement from still to video, allows for screen touch shooting and is shareable immediately. 

    If you need your platforms monitored (and who doesn't), HootSuites is the recommended app.

     Dragon Dictation is a great way to leave yourself a message without typing it. 

   Smith started off JournCamp and his interesting program was just the beginning. I highly recommend taking advantage if one comes your way.

It's a Hard-Knock Life

     No, I'm not going to jump into a production of Annie -- so be happy for that.

     As an on and off freelancer for many years, I agree with the statement that freelancing is a hard-knock life. 

      But, it can be absolutely worth it.

     Long before the decline of newsrooms, freelancing had a certain allure. Make your own hours (read that, write when the other parent was on duty). Be your own boss (read that, not work for an editor who was a) mean, b) nuts, c) boffing the 20-year-old photo clerk, d) a drunk, e) an EDITOR). Work on the stories you want (read that, not sitting through school board meetings). 

     Then the bottom fell out of the industry. A mixed blessing. It did increase the need for freelancers because news agencies didn't want to pay benefits. But, it also flooded the market with freelancers.

Alex Tarquinio

       Alex Tarquinio, a long-time freelancer in financial journalism, presented a talk on how to survive the hard-knock life of freelancing at the Society of Professional Journalists/Kiplinger JournCamp in NYC in June.

     Her audience ranged from students to recent grads to pros wanting to make the move to pros forced to make the move.

     For the newbies she had tips such as create a startup checklist, decide what life changes you are willing to make (life eating tuna sandwiches and ramen noodles every day for a year), and decide how far you are willing to go outside your comfort zone (like covering a rock-climbing wedding or, worse, back to the school board).

     As someone who has been on both sides of the freelancing game, stringer and editor, I can attest neither side is easy.

     Editors don't want to underpay hard-working and talented freelancers, they are forced to. And they don't have time to hand-hold rookies as much as they'd like to. So, those with experience are better off than newbies when they have to deal with editors.

     Seasoned pros have a different set of needs. We need to ask ourselves if we can afford the uncertainty. Once you have been used to a paycheck and a schedule, it can be unnerving to have to adjust your own time.

     Old pros may also have more trouble writing outside their comfort zone. As well as a smaller comfort zone. But, then again, some of us have written about nearly everything. . .

     It can also be harder for people used to having a job to market themselves. I found getting back into selling-myself mode the toughest part. But I did it. And hearing Alex was comforting in many ways.

"Just the facts, Ma'am"

     That's what Sgt. Joe Friday from the old TV series "Dragnet." And that's the way reporters think as well. 

     Reporters are taught to look for the facts. We are taught to look for the facts. We are also taught not to trust our emotions. Or anybody else's. We have to learn to write fast and short and use lots of quotes. That's what tells the whole story. But is it really the complete story?

     Since we have been taught the average attention span of the average reader is growing shorter, so clear, concise stories would seem to be the best choice. 

    Breaking news and other deadline stories do need to be told that way, but not all stories fit that format and we are not doing justice to our readers if we stick to it. 

     Tom Hallman is a Pulitzer Prize winner who had a story turned into a movie-of-the-week starring William H. Macy. He travels the country teaching old pros and new graduates his form of narrative journalism. He was one of the speakers at JournCamp, a joint Society of Professional Journalists/Kiplinger traveling show that made a stop in New York City in June. 

     Even though the room was full of people who rarely have the luxury to write exactly the way we want about whatever we want, he did present plenty of tips we can all use. 

     He reminds us while j-school can teach the skills, it can't teach the feeling necessary to craft a great story. And it can't teach you to see, to observe. 

     Hallman offered some advice that is basically common sense: read everything you can get your hands on, meet people, talk to people. You have to be able to talk to anybody at any time.

     I talk to people in the checkout line. On the subway. People are interesting. They have stories. And sometimes the best way to learn those stories is to tell a story of your own. 
      
      Today's newsroom isn't conducive to getting out of the newsroom, but getting out of the newsroom is essential. You have to people-watch and talk to people face to face. You can't fake interest. You have to be interested. 

     Hallman says you've got to be willing to dance with the story -- to bring your own energy. Sometimes your subject has energy, but you can't always count on it. 

     Always be open to the humorous, the lesson learned, Hallman says.

     So often there is humor even in the worst situations. But there is a limit, a difference between black humor (a staple of journalists) and bad taste. 

     When a giant sinkhole opened up in a municipal parking lot, I couldn't resist the headline, "The Sinkhole That Ate Stanhope." The mayor and council weren't happy, but even they knew I had to do it. 

     Just, as Elvis said, "don't be cruel."

Tom Hallman reads one of his narrative stories at JournCamp

 
    

Lois Duncan's "One for the Wolves"

     I can't even come close to relating to Lois Duncan's pain. Losing a child is the worst thing that can happen. But losing a child and not knowing what actually happened is particularly terrible. 

     Duncan and her husband, Don Arquette, were told their daughter, Kaitlyn, was killed in a drive-by shooting. But too many things didn't add up, so they feel they actually have no idea what happened to the 18-year-old, the youngest of their five children.

     One for the Wolves is the second book Duncan has written about the murder. The first book, Who Killed my Daughter? brought more evidence and more questions to the family.

     It's a complicated story. Kaitlyn had moved in with her boyfriend and apparently discovered his involvement with an insurance fraud scheme. Unfortunately, many of Kaitlyn's possessions that were taken by the police as evidence disappeared. In addition, she worked at an import store and there was evidence of the possible importing of drugs.

     Issues within the Albuquerque Police Department continued to complicate the case as well. The Arquettes hired private investigators, talked to the FBI and even consulted psychics to try to get to the bottom of their daughter's death. 

     Duncan, known for her young adult fiction, writes in a manner both informative and intimate. She details the complicated and frustrating efforts she and Don and many others went through. All the while, the reader senses the pain and anger. Finding the truth won't bring Kait back, but it would bring a type of closure. 

     Although most of us will never know the trauma Lois and Don suffer, we can all relate to a sense of not knowing. Duncan brings in related cases and several others in which parents are convinced they were never told the entire truth by the authorities. The feeling that the police not only less than forthcoming, but possibly culpable is frightening. It's not something most people would want to think about, but it could happen. And we should thank Lois Duncan for reminding us we can't always trust those we are most likely to trust.

     It is a difficult read, but an important book on many levels.  

What Can Replace Ads?

     Journalism isn't dying, Sree Sreenivasan, the guru of all things social media, said at a recent conference, the business is wobbly.

     Whether it's wobbly enough to say the era of ad-supported journalism is over is still being debated. 

     Ad-supported journalism has changed a good deal since the age of front page ads and wood cut graphics. Even since the age of those peculiar filler classified at the bottom of columns on the front page of The New York Times:

          "Urgent need for 19th Century French hand-painted wallpaper in muted tones of teal. MU8-6665."

          "Rosemary, I need you back before June 12. Bring the dog."

          "Waterfront sublet. Available March 1. Prefer hard-of-hearing person with large cat.  RI6 -4428." 
      
     The ad model has been undermined by the availability of many other ways to reach potential customers. Direct mail to the email inbox. Ads on your Facebook page. Pop-ups on the web pages you access. Of course there are still people in business who have a problem buying what is essential air, but lots of business folk seem to be moving in that direction. 

     So, how do you pay for getting the news to the people?

     There are models of not-for-profits working on a national scale, such as Pro Publica, which try to fill the gap in investigative reporting. But, investigative reporting isn't the only kind that suffers.

     A white paper by Steven Waldman and supported by the Ford Foundation was released by the Center for Cooperative Media at Montclair State University in New Jersey addresses the issue of labor-intensive local reporting. 

     According to Waldman, "Ad-based business models do not generate enough revenue to pay enough reporters enough money to do enough reporting." 

    Which may have always been the truth. . . 

     Waldman points out the number of words produced is as high as ever (some "editors" operate under the fantasy that quantity trumps quality), but the time required to report is not being compensated.

     Newsroom cutbacks don't leave enough staff to do sufficient reporting. Freelancers are paid by the story or the inch or the word so they can't afford to extensively research. This damages both investigative and beat reporting. 

     Obviously, no or low pay for investigative pieces pretty much eliminates the ability to produce any sort of thoughtful, indepth story.

     Day to day, beat reporting suffers as well. Waldman's white paper touches on this, but the reality is more nuanced than is likely to be discussed in an academic paper. 

     Covering a beat requires getting to know the people you need as sources. That takes time. 

Jefferson Township Council

     With cops, you have to prove you're one of the boys, especially if you aren't a boy. This includes not getting sick at gory car accidents, laughing at their sexist jokes and, on occasion, buying Burger King for children abandoned on the steps of police headquarters. 

    With municipal and county officials, you don't have to pretend you agree with their politics, but you have to sympathize. Roll your eyes and make sympathetic noises when the mayor is apoplectic because a tattoo parlor or check-cashing establishment opened on Main Street. Nod knowlingly when the council president gripes about his colleagues from the other party. It means making them comfortable with you. And that takes time. Time that's not always compensated. 

    The question remains can we ever return to successful beat reporting? I, for one, don't have an answer.

State park officials and residents at a Lake Hopatcong Commission meeting.

What's Wrong with Learning About Science

     I first wrote about people knowing more about pseudo-science than real science back in 1986.

     I think, back then, I figured it was some sort of temporary phenomenon. But no.

     Creationism is back with a vengeance. You would have thought that ended in the 1920s. But even today people want it taught in schools, right next to evolution as an acceptable "theory." Evolution is a scientific-backed theory. Creationism is a myth with variations in every major religion.

     Then there are the anti-vaxxers. Sure, it's smart to consult with your pediatrician about vaccines. It's smart to talk to your pediatrician about everything. What is not smart is believing a former model and a discredited medical study rather than many studies that have not been discredited.

     And the folks who -- even as they are being blown away by a super hurricane -- claim climate change is a hoax perpetrated by a clandestine green conspiracy. Trust me on this, the Bolshevik Tree Huggers aren't organized enough to form a conspiracy of this magnitude. Or any magnitude.

     When I was a kid, science was cool. Mostly because of the space program. Where I grew up we were surrounded by space. The Naval Air Research Testing Station at Lake Denmark was where the early titan rockets were developed. Aircraft Radio Corporation was site of the first instruments-only airplane flight. Reaction Motors was where the adventurous employees used prototype Jet Packs to jump over the perimeter fence.

     Sure, the space program lost its glamor as it lost its funding, but what about other exciting aspects of science?

     Medicine? Medical science can now determine the predisposition for devastating diseases like Tay-Sachs or Huntington's. Long-term survival rates for cancers that not long ago were a death sentence. Yet I hear people claim Big Pharma is withholding cures for cancer.

     The Cosmos? I'm forever seeing Facebook posts about Mercury being in retrograde and that somehow causing bad luck. But what about the actual wonder of a star-studded sky? Oh, right, the paranoid among us want to put lights everywhere so we can't see the sky.

     It makes me want to start a campaign to have People magazine name Neil DeGrasse Tyson 2016 Sexiest Man Alive.

      Brains are sexy.

I Am Sally Draper

     Spoiler alert:  I'm not gonna post a spoiler.

     I will say I was satisfied with the final Mad Men episode. I know some people were disappointed, but some people will always be disappointed. 

     I caught a little of the marathon during the week before the finale and enjoyed many of the comments from viewers, especially from the woman who saw the show as Sally Draper's story. It wasn't until she put it in words that I realized that's exactly the way I saw it. 

     Sally was the character I could relate to. I wasn't a grown-up in the 60s. I didn't know what the workplace looked like. I remember my father wearing a suit and a fedora to work and my mother a housedress around the house. I saw the era and the show through the same eyes as Sally. 

     I noticed all the things that have changed:  the smoking mostly, but also the drinks cart in the offices. Sure, I worked places where there was always a bottle of whiskey under the darkroom sink. And somebody always had a bottle of bourbon in the lower right-hand desk drawer. But that was for emergencies, not everyday consumption. I loved watching the clothes go from shirtwaists to miniskirts. And the men's hair creep below their collars. I am still nostalgic for when men wore their hair longer. It just looked better. 

     I also noticed the things that haven't changed all that much. There is still a glass ceiling and there are still people (men) who are clueless about it. One of my favorite moments of the show was when Peggy pointed out to her relentlessly liberal boyfriend during one of his rants about his support of  "the Negroes" that "I can't do those things, either." Classic moment.

     Watching Sally grow up and figure out the grownups around her was a constant reminder of my own place in that era. I didn't see some of the more shocking things she saw, but I did discover the people who were running the world were seriously flawed. Sally's story helped us remember it was the WWII/Korea generation that created the Baby Boomers.

     Between bringing in the real events and the real products of the times and presenting Sally's view, Mad Men succeeded as both a history lesson and a cautionary tale.