Recent Posts

SPONSOR LINKS


FEEDS

  • Subscribe in NewsGator Online

DIRECTORIES





  • British Blog Directory.


  • Listed on BlogShares

Blog powered by TypePad

« April 2005 | Main | June 2005 »

18 May 2005

UK election blogging

The Editor: What they said in ... the election blogs
From Guardian - 07/05/2005
William Cederwell

Labour may have enjoyed a historic third consecutive election win on Friday, but there was only muted cheer from the election blogs. A common complaint - as aired by "Enigmatic" at the election2005.bravereflections blog - was the "wild" distortion caused by the first-past-the-post electoral system. "So, it's four/five more years of New Labour. Well, tarnished Labour, to be precise. The really bad news is that we have, again, a government which only about 36% of the nation supports. Read that again. For every Labour voter there are two who didn't vote Labour."

Labour "are still going to end up with a 10% majority of the seats", wrote "Sliver" at sliver.objective2k.com . And "the Tories with 33% get around 50 more seats but that percentage of the vote is exactly the same as it was last time. The Liberal Democrats get a consistent 6-7% (going as high as 17%) swing against Labour . . . yet only come out with 10 or so more seats."

So which party had most cause to be triumphant? None of them, reckoned the self-confessed "utopian, dreamy anarcho-capitalist", Guido Fawkes, at 5thnovember.blogspot.com . "Labour's victory came on the back of the smallest winning share of the vote ever recorded." The "poor showing" of the Lib Dems meant they were "not a real alternative", and "the Tories failed to break 200 seats, which was the target. So no victory parade for them."

Perhaps the real winners were "the 'others' - smaller parties and independent candidates" who scooped a "remarkable 8%", reckoned redpepper.blogs.com . "A similar pattern has been seen elsewhere in western Europe," where "major parties have been haemorrhaging support".

For a sense of triumph, one had to visit toryscum.com , which crowed: "Michael Howard conceded defeat at 4.20am this morning. Our work here is done."

A posting at the notapathetic.com message board, meanwhile, had a sharp word for the abstainers. "If you don't like any of the political parties, either join one to change it, set up your own, or stand yourself as an independent. Or return to this website and change your posting to I'm too lazy and stupid to do anything about my own dissatisfaction." William Cederwell

The Wrap is Guardian Unlimited's unique digest of the best of the British newspapers. An annual subscription - 260 issues - costs 14.95. guardian.co.uk/thewrap

Copyright 2005 Guardian Newspapers Limited
Date: 07/05/2005
Publication: Guardian

A Blog Revolution? Get a Grip

A Blog Revolution? Get a Grip
From New York Times - 08/05/2005
By TOM ZELLER Jr.

DON'T ask Nick Denton, publisher of Gawker Media and its growing list of popular Web logs, about his empire. ''People come up to me as if it's witty and say, 'How is the empire going?''' Mr. Denton said, ''which is pretty pathetic.''

Don't ask him about his business plan, either. He says he never had one. The only reason he formed the company, he said, was to make his network of blogs -- which includes Gawker, the flagship chronicle of Manhattan news and gossip; Fleshbot, the thinking person's diary of smut; and about 10 other titles -- more attractive to advertisers.

''It doesn't help with readers,'' he said. ''It's actually a disadvantage, because it looks corporate.''

At a time when media conferences like ''Les Blogs'' in Paris two weeks ago debate the potential of the form, and when BusinessWeek declares, as it did on its May 2 cover, that ''Blogs Will Change Your Business,'' Mr. Denton is withering in his contempt. A blog, he says, is much better at tearing things down -- people, careers, brands -- than it is at building them up. As for the blog revolution, Mr. Denton put it this way: ''Give me a break.''

''The hype comes from unemployed or partially employed marketing professionals and people who never made it as journalists wanting to believe,'' he said. ''They want to believe there's going to be this new revolution and their lives are going to be changed.''

For all of the stiff-arming and disdain that Mr. Denton brings to the discussion of this nonrevolution, however, there is no question that he and his team are trying to turn the online diarist's form -- ephemeral, fast-paced and scathingly opinionated -- into a viable, if not lucrative, enterprise. Big advertisers like Audi, Nike and General Electric have all vied for eyeballs on Gawker's blogs, which Mr. Denton describes as sexy, irreverent, a tad elitist and unabashedly coastal.

He says that there is no magic behind Gawker Media, his three-year-old venture based in New York. To his mind, it is built around a basic publishing model. But like it or not in the overheated atmosphere of blog-o-mania, Mr. Denton, 38, remains one of the most watched entrepreneurs in the business.

If his reluctance to be interviewed is theater, it is deft theater. A British expatriate and former Financial Times reporter, Mr. Denton is tall, slim, and salt-and-pepper handsome, with the slightly embarrassed air of someone who invested in the dot-com boom and came out unscathed. (He made millions in two previous ventures -- including a company called Moreover Technologies, an online news aggregator that presaged the twitchy, check-this-out linking that now make blogs de rigueur reading for desk jockeys worldwide.)

STRIDING toward the unadorned third-floor TriBeCa loft that is the closest thing to a Gawker nerve center, Mr. Denton reiterated, in a polite, sometimes halting staccato that often fades into a string of inaudible syllables, that he would not discuss money. He declined to say if Gawker was profitable, or how much he paid Gawker's dozen or so bloggers -- editors, as the company calls them.

He fired up a Marlboro Light and, hustling across Canal Street, chattered obliquely about overhead (minimal in the blogging business), libel (always a concern) and Fred Durst.

In March, Mr. Durst, the Limp Bizkit front man, sued Gawker, among other sites, for linking to a sex video in which he appeared.

''Honestly, though, we don't know why you're so mad at us,'' Gawker's editor, Jessica Coen, sneered in a March 4 entry. ''The situation is really rather simple. Someone sent us a link to a video of your penis, we went into shock, and we shared it with the world for about two hours. Then we wept, found God, took a hot bath, and removed the video from our site.''

Mr. Durst eventually dropped the suit.

A grueling climb led to the quiet, whitewashed loft space where a few Gawker Media hands -- including Lockhart Steele, the company's managing editor, and Gina Trapani, the editor of one of the company's newest blogs, Lifehacker -- were plucking away at laptops. (Gawker shares the space with another blogger, Maxwell Gillingham-Ryan of Apartment Therapy.)

Mr. Steele, who joined the company in February, is the den mother for Gawker's far-flung collection of bloggers and is in near constant communication with them throughout the day via Instant Messenger. About half of the editors live in New York. The rest are distributed around the country. In California, Mark Lisanti edits Defamer, the Los Angeles counterpart to Gawker, and in Colorado, Brian D. Crecente edits one of the newer sites, Kotaku, dedicated to video games. In New Orleans, John d'Addario edits Fleshbot, while Ana Marie Cox covers political gossip from Washington on Wonkette.

Each editor is under contract to post 12 times a day for a flat fee, Mr. Steele said. (Gawker has two editors and now posts 24 times a day.) It is best to have eight posts up before noon, if possible, to keep readers coming back, he said.

The editors scan the Web for the best tidbits. Readers, and apparently even published authors, send in tips. When a Gawker site highlights articles from, say, The Wall Street Journal or The New York Times, it is likely, both Mr. Steele and Mr. Denton said, that the article's author sent an e-mail message to Gawker pointing out its existence. (This reporter's naivete about this process was met with gentle laughter.)

Site traffic is a particular obsession. Gawker draws just over a million unique visitors a month; Fleshbot, the most popular site, lures nearly twice that number, and Gizmodo, a site dedicated to gadgets, roughly 1.5 million. All editors can earn bonuses if they manage to generate spikes in traffic -- say, with a link to the latest Paris Hilton crisis or Fred Durst's anatomy.

Ms. Trapani's hour-by-hour traffic statistics serve as the desktop image on her computer. ''It's extremely fast paced,'' she said. ''It's a lot of output. Some days it's overwhelming without a doubt. Other days it goes really smoothly if I get some good reader tips and there's something great going on.''

Like Mr. Denton, she was careful not to discuss specifics of Gawker's business, including how much its editors are paid. But a published interview with Mr. Steele earlier this year provides some insight. Bloggers are paid a set rate of $2,500 a month, he told a digital journalism class at New York University taught by Patrick Phillips, the editor and founder of I Want Media, a Web site focusing on media news.

When asked in the class if the company was in the black, his response was straightforward. ''It is profitable,'' Mr. Steele said. ''We're very small, have no overhead, no office space. Everybody works from home. And you heard what we pay our writers. Nick founded Gawker very specifically with the idea of starting a whole bunch of blogs in very niche topic areas, hire freelance writers to write each of them, hopefully draw a lot of eyeballs and then sell advertising around it. He had the idea that no one site would probably ever make a fortune. But if you have 10 sites each making $75,000 a year, then, O.K., maybe it's not like Conde Nast money, but it's a nice little business.''

Mr. Denton chafed at the mention of Mr. Steele's interview. He said it was misreported and was supposed to be off the record. Mr. Phillips said that no such arrangement existed, and that the posted interview was an exact transcript from a recording of the session.

Whatever the circumstances, for those quivering about the revolutionary potential of blog publishing, or wondering what makes ventures like Gawker tick, there couldn't have been a plainer explanation.

The simplicity of the model may be why Mr. Denton is alternately guarded and dismissive of all the hype surrounding blogs. He seems to recognize that he is not up to anything particularly trailblazing, and that it's only a matter of time before others catch on. Competitors like Jason Calacanis's Weblogs, with its network of more than 70 consumer and niche blogs, are already copying the Gawker model.

The idea of grouping the blogs, Mr. Denton said, was to give the company an air of respectability. ''The only reason we're listed as a group at all is for advertisers,'' he said. ''Advertisers treat Gawker titles more seriously because it's part of a group.''

In other words, Gawker speaks their language. It has a publication schedule and can traffic in digital marketing babble like ''frequency capping'' (how often an advertising spot runs) and ''skyscrapers'' (tall, thin ads).

Such familiarity with the ways of Madison Avenue makes a difference in the world of blogs, where marketers still fear to tread, said Jill Griffin, who is now a senior vice president and group account director at Media Contacts, the interactive division of the Media Planning Group of Havas. Earlier, when she was a digital strategist at the marketing firm OMD, Ms. Griffin was one of the first advertising executives to bring big-name clients to blogs -- including Absolut and G.E. to Gawker.

''I think it was in mid-2003,'' Ms. Griffin said. ''It was just myself and some friends and business associates in the professional advertising community. We just started reading Gawker because we thought it was a hoot.'' She said that after realizing that they were all single, young, well-paid and casting their gaze on this fertile space, she thought, ''We've got to get on that.''

On the Gawker sites, C.P.M. rates -- the cost for every 1,000 times an ad is presumably seen by visitors -- can run anywhere from $4 for a small, button-sized ad to $50 for exclusive-sponsorship ads, in which an advertiser helps underwrite the debut of a new Gawker site. (Sony did this for Gawker's blog Lifehacker.)

Mr. Denton says that a clear line is drawn between news and advertising, and that so far none of the companies buying space on the sites -- including the Times auto section, which advertised on the car blog Jalopnik -- have ever tried to influence content. The editors are expected to write a ''thank-you to our sponsors'' at the end of each week, although this is typically done sarcastically -- for example, thanking advertisers for keeping the staff well-stocked in crack cocaine.

''It goes beyond any kind of question of church and state or journalistic ethics that the whole editorial tone of the Gawker sites is absolutely wrapped up in the notion of take no prisoners,'' Mr. Denton said. ''It owes nothing to anybody, and if one ever started compromising that, it would be grim.''

But others have begun to wonder if the brand itself is a form of compromise. Stowe Boyd, president of Corante, a daily online news digest on the technology sector, suggests that there may be something lost when networks like Gawker Media and Weblogs turn blogs into commodities, churned out for a fee, owned by an overlord and underwritten by advertisers.

''They're pursuing a very clear agenda and they've done very well with that,'' Mr. Boyd said of Gawker. ''But they're just an old media company in new media clothes, and I still maintain that they are missing part of the point.''

The point, Mr. Boyd said, is that blogging is unique because of its spontaneity and individualism, and that bloggers, like dancers and sculptors, are most interesting because they are ''pursuing their muse.''

The editors on Gawker are talented, entertaining and informative, Mr. Boyd said, but also indistinguishable from any freelance writer, with no ownership of what they produce. ''These people are hirelings,'' he said. ''What they are cranking out are the 700 words they signed on to produce.''

Other critics of the blog movement wonder whether the hoopla over the commercial viability of blogs -- particularly as publishing ventures -- is overstated. ''Blogs primarily excel at marketing and promotion for companies or individuals,'' Mr. Phillips of I Want Media said. ''I think blogging can catapult unknown writers, and it can give them a platform if they're talented. But as a stand-alone business, I think the jury is still out on that.''

Mr. Denton, who says that no one, least of all him, is becoming rich publishing blogs, would seem to agree with that notion. It's not about the money, he said -- or about corrupting the art of the blogger. ''If someone is saying that we publish according to a routine of at least 12 posts a day and begin in the morning and if someone is sick we replace them, then I plead guilty,'' he said. ''We believe in regular posting schedules.''

But he also says that nothing he is doing prevents other blogging models from taking shape, or independent bloggers from logging on and doing what they have always done. ''Some of my own favorite sites are ones that have no consistency beyond the wit and charm of the writer,'' he said. ''There's room for both.''

And there is, apparently, a ceiling on Gawker's expansion. Last month, the company started Sploid, a Drudge-like headline news blog with a tabloid look, and Mr. Denton says two more titles are planned for the short term, although he would not be specific about the particular consumer itches he'll be scratching this time. Having covered everything from BlackBerries to Beltway gossip, it's hard to imagine what else looms, but he said writers had already been lined up.

That will bring the number of titles to 14, and Mr. Denton indicated that 17 seemed a good stopping point, if for no other reason than that is the number of titles published by Conde Nast.

He also plans to reintroduce Gawker's ''blog of blogs,'' called Kinja -- a service that even Mr. Denton says was rather badly deployed and even more awkwardly explained in its original form. A team of programmers has been working for the last two years to revamp the service, which allows users to explore and scan their favorite blogs in one place. The new version will be ready in about a month.

SO, onward goes the nonrevolution. ''If you take the amount of attention that has been devoted in the last year to Web logs as a business and something that's going to change business and compare that with the real effect and the real money, it's totally disproportionate,'' Mr. Denton said, ''in the same way all the coverage of the Internet in the late 90's was out of whack.

''There are too many people looking at blogs as being some magic bullet for every company's marketing problem, and they're not,'' he added. ''It's Internet media. It's just the latest iteration of Internet media.''

Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company
Date: 08/05/2005
Publication: New York Times

Blogging ethics

The Latest Rumbling in the Blogosphere: Questions About Ethics
From New York Times - 08/05/2005
By ADAM COHEN

Bloggers like to demonize the MSM (that's Mainstream Media), but it is increasingly hard to think of the largest news blogs as being outside the mainstream. Bloggers have been showing up at national political conventions, at the World Economic Forum at Davos and on the cover of Business Week. Establishment warhorses like Arthur Schlesinger Jr. are signing on to write for Arianna Huffington's blog collective. And Garrett Graff, of FishbowlDC, broke through the cyberceiling recently and acquired the ultimate inside-the-Beltway media credential: a White House press pass.

Bloggers are not only getting access; they have also been getting results. The Drudge Report, of course, is famous for pushing stories, often with a rightward spin, onto the national media agenda, but it is not alone. Daily Kos did a brilliant job last fall of pressuring Sinclair Broadcasting not to show a hatchet-job documentary about John Kerry. And Joshua Micah Marshall has been rattling Congress with his entertaining and influential listing of where individual members stand on Social Security privatization. Blogs helped to shape, in some cases in major ways, some of the biggest stories of the last year -- the presidential election, tsunami relief, Dan Rather.

The thing about influence is that, as bloggers well know, it is only a matter of time before people start trying to hold you accountable. Bloggers are so used to thinking of themselves as outsiders, and watchdogs of the LSM (that's Lame Stream Media), that many have given little thought to what ethical rules should apply in their online world. Some insist that they do not need journalistic ethics because they are not journalists, but rather activists, or humorists, or something else entirely. But more bloggers, and blog readers, are starting to ask whether at least the most prominent blogs with the highest traffic shouldn't hold themselves to the same high standards to which they hold other media.

Every mainstream news organization has its own sets of ethics rules, but all of them agree broadly on what constitutes ethical journalism. Information should be verified before it is printed, and people who are involved in a story should be given a chance to air their viewpoints, especially if they are under attack. Reporters should avoid conflicts of interest, even significant appearances of conflicts, and disclose any significant ones. Often, a conflict means being disqualified to cover a story or a subject. When errors are discovered or pointed out by internal or external sources, they must be corrected. And there should be a clear wall between editorial content and advertising.

Bloggers often invoke these journalistic standards in criticizing the MSM, and insist on harsh punishment when they are violated. The blogs that demanded Dan Rather's ouster accused him of old-school offenses: not sufficiently checking the facts about President Bush's National Guard service, refusing to admit and correct errors, and having undisclosed political views that shaded the journalism. Eason Jordan, CNN's chief news executive, resigned this year after a blogmob attacked him for a reported statement at the World Economic Forum at Davos that the military had aimed at journalists in Iraq and killed 12 of them. Their complaint was even more basic than in Mr. Rather's case: they were upset that Mr. Jordan said something they believed to be untrue.

But Mr. Rather's and Mr. Jordan's misdeeds would most likely not have landed them in trouble in the world of bloggers, where few rules apply. Many bloggers make little effort to check their information, and think nothing of posting a personal attack without calling the target first -- or calling the target at all. They rarely have procedures for running a correction. The wall between their editorial content and advertising is often nonexistent. (Wonkette, a witty and well-read Washington blog, posts a weekly shout-out inside its editorial text to its advertisers, including partisan ones like Democrats.org.) And bloggers rarely disclose whether they are receiving money from the people or causes they write about.

A few bloggers have begun calling for change. There have even been fledgling attempts to create ethical guidelines, like the ones found at Cyberjournalist.net. Defenders of the status quo argue that ethics rules are not necessary in the blogosphere because truth emerges through ''collaboration,'' and that bias and conflicts of interest are rooted out by ''transparency.'' But ''collaboration'' is a haphazard way of defending against dishonesty and slander, and blogs are actually not all that transparent. MSM journalists write under their own names. Someone would be likely to notice if a newspaper reporter covering a campaign was also on the campaign's staff. But it is hard to know who many bloggers are, and whether they are paid to take the positions they are espousing.

Richard Hofstadter noted in ''The Age of Reform'' that American reformers had been prone to an ''enormous amount of self-accusation.'' Throughout history, reform movements have ostentatiously held themselves to higher standards than the institutions they attacked. The political reformers who took on Tammany Hall declared that they would not accept patronage jobs. Members of the Woman's Christian Temperance Union took a Temperance Pledge.

Many bloggers who criticize the MSM's ethics, however, are in the anomalous position of holding themselves to lower standards, or no standards at all. That may well change. Ana Marie Cox, who edits Wonkette, notes that blogs are still ''a very young medium,'' and that ''things have yet to be worked out.'' Before long, leading blogs could have ethics guidelines and prominently posted corrections policies.

Bloggers may need to institutionalize ethics policies to avoid charges of hypocrisy. But the real reason for an ethical upgrade is that it is the right way to do journalism, online or offline. As blogs grow in readers and influence, bloggers should realize that if they want to reform the American media, that is going to have to include reforming themselves.$123

Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company


Date: 08/05/2005
Publication: New York Times

Blogs for business

PubFirms line up to rocket into the blogosphere
From Sunday Times - 08/05/2005
Paul Durman

Companies are waking up to 'blogs' -a new way of listening, and talking, to customers. Report by Paul Durman.

IMAGINE the internet as a large, cacophonous pub 10 minutes from closing time. There are a thousand different conversations in progress. Many consist of little more than childish nonsense. Many are conducted in shrill and angry voices. But some of those present are expressing strong and heartfelt opinions. Some of them will act on them tomorrow. And some of them are your customers.

This, very roughly, is the "blogosphere", the fast-growing part of the internet made up of web logs -the online diaries known as blogs. Amid the mass of meaningless chatter and confusion, many contend that the blogging phenomenon is a communications revolution, as important for business to understand as it is for politics and the media. Those who can grasp the opportunities can shape or protect their reputations. Many entrepreneurs think they can scent money-making possibilities.

Technorati, a web-monitoring firm, tracks almost 10m blogs, a number that doubles every five months. In Korea, the broadband capital of the world, there are an estimated 12m bloggers. France has 2m, most linked to the Skyrock radio station.

In Britain blogging has yet to grip the public imagination. But Azeem Azhar, who used to run a blogging service called 20six, reckons there are at least 700,000 UK bloggers. The general election has provided a modest fillip. A Keele University website lists 170 election blogs, including 70 by MPs, candidates and parties, and a handful from major news organisations including the BBC, The Times, The Guardian and The Sun's Trevor Kavanagh.

The real interest in blogging, though, is in the hundreds of thousands of nano-websites produced by "citizen journalists" -commenting and reporting on anything and everything.

Azhar said: "If bloggers write about a product, they probably care about it, either positively or negatively, more than the normal person. They are most likely to be your evangelist customers, most likely to recommend your product to their friends." Or to discourage others from ever touching it.

In America politicians and big business have been transfixed by the need to influence this new form of online debate. Bloggers made a lively contribution to the presidential election. They are credited with hastening the retirement of Dan Rather, the veteran CBS news anchor embarrassed by a bogus story attacking George Bush.

Big companies are starting to experiment with their own corporate blogs, partly to get their own messages out, partly as a way of listening to their customers.

Robert Scoble, a "technical evangelist" at Microsoft, has become a blogging celebrity, helping to soften the software giant's abrasive image with his Scobleizer blog.

But few British companies seem ready for this change. According to Mark Rogers, a founder of BBC Online who now runs Market Sentinel, a web-monitoring firm, BT is the only FTSE100 company that is set up to distribute its news via RSS, or Really Simple Syndication. RSS newsreaders are the easiest way to track news and what blogs are saying. But without an RSS feed, companies' own announcements are largely invisible in the blogosphere.

Rogers said: "It's a real problem for companies that get embroiled in controversy, because responding to blogging attacks requires different smarts to the normal PR response. The more controversial and outspoken (bloggers) are, the more likely people are to link to you." This in turn increases the visibility of a scabrous blog to internet search engines.

Google owns Blogger, the biggest of the services that is facilitating this low-cost publishing boom. Although most bloggers are indulging their own passion and desire for self-expression, a minority are more commercial, and are able to attract pay-per-click advertising from Google and Yahoo.

Nick Denton, former Financial Times journalist turned internet entrepreneur, regards blogs as a way of cheaply producing magazines for niche audiences. His firm, Gawker Media, produces some of the best-read blogs on the internet, including Gawker on Manhattan gossip and Gizmodo on gadgets.

Others, including Market Sentinel and Infonic, are creating a business by advising large companies on how to make sense of the blogosphere.

Roy Lipski of Infonic, which advises Unilever, said: "Our business is to help corporates understand the shifting landscape of opinions. What do people think about their business, their brands, their reputation? Companies in sectors where public opinion can have a dramatic effect will be taking this very seriously."

Copyright 2005 Times Newspapers Limited

Date: 08/05/2005
Publication: Sunday Times

Celebrity blogging

The Guide: Famous last words: There's no need to bleat about the rumour factory or protest about being misquoted any more. Publicity-conscious stars always have the final say on their blogs, finds Johnny Sharp
From Guardian - 14/05/2005

What kind of sad individual posts their own diary on the internet, as if thousands of total strangers would ever be interested in their lives? An arrogant, self-obsessed exhibitionist perhaps? That would surely be a harsh critique of the McBride family from Berwick-upon-Tweed, who innocently update the world on their garage extension and Chloe's mumps. But one rapidly growing group of web loggers have always had those qualities in spades. They are celebrities, and they've taken to blogging with great enthusiasm, as an ideal way of appearing to keep in touchy-feely direct contact with their public without having to wash their hands afterwards. Britney Spears, for instance, recently announced her pregnancy through her website, as if writing a letter to close family. Now the craze has taken the next logical step, with a US website which promises to commission a pool of 250 of "the most creative minds in the country" to take it in turns to write a blog on the pressing issues of the day. The American columnist and socialite Arianna Huffington is the genius behind www.huffington post.com, which promises contributors such as Norman Mailer, Warren Beatty, Maggie Gyllenhaal and Gwyneth Paltrow. Surely it can only be a matter of time before the Queen herself launches a blog, to keep us updated on the latest antics of the corgis and her state visit to Fiji, and to remind us: "Don't forget to watch me on telly on Christmas day, BBC1, 3pm." So which are actually worth reading? Well, they can be roughly divided into the following categories:

Self-promotion

The most obvious motivation for a celebrity blog is the same reason celebs appear on chat shows or agree to be gunged on children's TV. They have a product to plug.

David Duchovny has recently been plugging his directorial debut The House Of D by blogging at www.lionsgatedirectors.com/duchovny/. He posts daily, sometimes on video, but the entries can pretty much be summed up by the sentence "My new movie is out with a bunch of marvellous, talented actors in, I don't care what the critics say, no really I don't, go and see it and make all your friends see it."

It's a similar story with Jeff Bridges' blog at jeffbridges.com, but it's raised above the average by virtue of the fact it's handwritten, and accompanied by childlike and quite endearing doodle drawings. If you have a graphologist or Jungian psychoanalyst nearby when you view it, there could be a few insights to be gained.

Some, of course, are fighting the good fight. Jamie Oliver recently won an award for his blog at www.jamieoliver.com, where he has kept his "fans" in touch with his campaign to stop schoolkids eating deep-fried pigs' genitals.

But it's hard sell all the way from used-band salesman supreme Gene Simmons of Kiss. He has jumped on the blogging bandwagon to shamelessly plug his TV appearances (such as his presenting role in Channel 4's upcoming Rock School) and whatever Kiss-related merchandise he's dreamt up this week. Fans even suggest their own marketing ideas. With most other bands, if they so much as sponsored a range of plectrums they'd be accused of selling out. Kiss's fans such as Alain from France say: "How about Chicken McNuggets in Kiss talisman shapes?" Ye gods.

Urge to confess

Unlike their "civilian" counterparts, few stars are brave enough to say what they really think, let alone name names on their blogs. One exception is big-shorted Limp Bizkit frontman and all round farce-on-legs Fred Durst, who broke one of the celebrity stories of 2003 when he poured his heavily tattooed heart out about his undying love for "really cool southern girl" Britney Spears at www.limpbizkit.com. He probably felt he was "keeping it real", but Britney denied everything, while Durst's own fans were mortified at him dating, like, a pop star, dude. They're easily annoyed, mind. Last week their messageboards were suggesting boycotting the new LB album after he advocated they download it for free. Don't ask me why.

Fat-and-proud comedienne Rosie O'Donnell, (think "gay American Dawn French"), got into similar trouble in March after speaking her mind at www.rosie.com ("the unedited rantings of a fat, 43 year-old, menopausal, ex-talkshow host"). It's a strange enough affair at the best of times since Rosie writes her entries in free verse, but her meaning was clear when she mocked fellow tent-wearer Kirstie Alley for claiming to have been "201 pounds at my heaviest". "I am 220," she wrote, as if in competition. "'Fess up Kirstie, 201 my ass." After an angry phone call from Alley, the following entry was posted:

"The phone

Kirstie w/hurt feelings

I am sorry

4 that"

My life story

The logical conclusion to the confessional blog is the approach taken by former Smashing Pumpkins singer Billy Corgan, who not only offers diary entries, but is writing his autobiography at www.billycorgan.com. Freed from the probing of the untermensch journalists he hates so much, he's been surprisingly revealing about his traumatic upbringing, and battles with depression, drink and drugs. He even tells the tale of ending up in bed with a pre-op transsexual: "I beg off politely, saying it's not really my trip, and I'm *boom* out the door, on the street laughing to myself." He has promised to be similarly unflinching in his descriptions of his grunge-era contemporaries and former paramours such as Courtney Love. I feel a feud coming on.

Putting the world to rights

While the world waits for the great and the good to deliver us from evil via The Huffington Post blog, some stars have already been fighting the good fight on the web for some time now. Barbra Streisand's website features 30 pages worth of "statements" by Ms Streisand featuring endless facts, figures and opinions on everything from corporate tax rates to Dick Cheney's congressional voting record. If it wasn't for the incongruous sight of our heroine sat at the top of the page on a shiny pink throne in an off-the-shoulder dress, clutching a bunch of roses, you could be forgiven for thinking there'd been a content mix-up with the official website for Rage Against The Machine.

Britney Spears, meanwhile, has been gunning for that traditional celebrity target - the press - at britneyspears.com.

"I'd like them to ask themselves the question, 'What am I lying to myself about?' Is it that you are 50 pounds overweight? Is it that your children aren't making wise decisions? Or is it maybe that your husband or boyfriend is cheating on you?"

I'm saying nothing.

Verbal diarrhoea

Of course, in the world of the rich and famous just as in the real one, there are people who simply wander aimlessly around talking to no one in particular.

Moby's blog is updated almost daily, full of his undeniably intelligent and quite often amusing observations on life, art, veganism and religion.

A somewhat looser cannon is Aki Riihilahti, a lesser known Finnish footballer with relegation-threatened Premiership club Crystal Palace, who has become a cult figure in the past couple of years with his deep-thinking and startlingly honest weekly musings in pidgin English.

How about this from September 2004?: "Someone tried to put their thumb in my arse last week. I've never before experienced such a gruel (sic) attack. I was only trying to block keepers view standing next to the wall. Luckily the finger was blocked by my shorts."

Or this from October: "I want to win. It is like a drug. I could never get enough of it. The feeling of it is something between the day of graduation, drunken laugh, your first kiss and Jerry Springer show: it is mad, un-describable and over-exaggerated joy. Hiroshima! That is how I feel after a lost game."

David Beckham, take note. If you'd spent your spare time blogging instead of texting, you might be far happier. *

Copyright 2005 Guardian Newspapers Limited
Date: 14/05/2005
Publication: Guardian

Watch what you say!

Blog no evil;
Libel laws and angry readers make bloggers regret their online rants
From Straits Times - 15/05/2005
Ng Mei Yan

IF YOU think you can rant and rave on your Web log and get away with it, think again. Last March, Mediaah!, a media-criticism blog run by Pradyuman Maheshwari of India, was given a legal notice by the Times of India newspaper to remove 19 libellous posts from the website. The blogger chose to shut down the site instead.

And in Singapore, the Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*Star) recently took former scholar Chen Jiahao, 23, and Jeremy Chen, 22, an engineering student, to task for allegedly making defamatory remarks about the agency in their online journals. While Jeremy settled the matter amicably with the agency, Jiahao was nearly served with a libel suit before he extended his unreserved apology to the agency.

Hands up, those who still think blogs are the cyber equivalent of your hardcover diary. 'Blogs cannot be considered personal space because everyone can see it. And because of that, the law of defamation still applies,' said Mr Bryan Tan, a lawyer at Tan and Tan Partnership, who specialises in IT law. And you're not off the hook even if you protect your blog with a password and give access only to certain people. 'As past experience with e-mail has shown, it can be copied and forwarded to the whole world in a matter of minutes,' he added.

And the Internet crosses national boundaries. Even if defamatory comments are posted on a website hosted overseas, the content publisher can be sued in a country where the website has been accessed. 'The latest thinking is that if someone in Singapore can read and has read the comments, then the act is committed in Singapore,' said Mr Tan.

So what can you say or not say on the Internet? One of the defences against the charge of defamation is for the comment to be fair. 'The law allows you to have an opinion about something,' said Ms Doris Chia, a partner at Harry Elias Partnership. 'The comment is fair if the facts that support the comment are true and that it was made without malice,' she added.

Said Mr Tan: 'If you think a play is not entertaining and you state the reasons why, then that's fair. But if you say the play is the worst in the world and you can't back that up, then you're in trouble.'

When found guilty of defamation, the compensation amount can range from hundreds of dollars to hundreds of thousands of dollars, depending on how many people had read the defamatory material, the nature of the content, the level of aggravation and the social standing of the victim, said Mr Wilson Wong, a lawyer at Drew and Napier.

And a person does not have to be of a minimum age to be charged. Even if the law doesn't get to the bloggers, other Netizens will. There have been cases of people taking their own 'action' against abusive bloggers. 'Brose' incurred the wrath of Netizens after he put up a long entry calling the girls in his university 'boring' and 'ugly'. The multitude of hate comments from other bloggers made him shut down his blog for more than a week.

He wrote: 'The reason why I decided to terminate this blog is because the original reason for its creation and existence is now gone. 'It was supposed to be fun for me to write and de-stress, to express my views on the Internet where free speech is being practised. Now this is no longer fun nor is it private.'

But young bloggers interviewed by The Sunday Times said they were not worried about getting into any trouble. 'I don't attack or put people down on my blog, so I am not bothered,' said Mr Ho Yong Min, 21, who is waiting to enter university. He posts reflective and philosophical entries rather than narrative ones.

Prominent blogger Wendy Cheng, 21, also known as 'Xia- xue', said: 'I know the people whom I criticise are not going to come after me and sue me. I don't write about companies and they are the ones that will sue.' One of the few who is more conscious about what she writes is 18-year-old Shandy Yeo, a student at a private school who blogs about her daily life.

She told The Sunday Times that she is not taking any chances with the law. 'I think I will be more careful about what I write, and won't venture into topics like politics, race and religion.' As veteran blogger Lee Kin Mun, 35, advised: 'I think the most important guideline is if you are prepared to put a strong statement out there, be prepared to receive a strong statement back and be prepared to defend it when people criticise, or be able to take the criticism with a thick skin.'

Said lawyer Tan: 'Do be sensitive about what you write. Even if it is not defamatory, would the person being targeted benefit from your views? 'Criticism is not wrong if it is constructive. I would advise bloggers to think about what they are putting out there and rectify it before it hurts anyone.'

But what if you need to rant? Said Mr Lee: 'The most secure blog you have is the Microsoft Word in your C drive.'

Copyright 2005 Singapore Press Holdings Limited
Date: 15/05/2005
Publication: Straits Times

Blogs are the future of news?

Come on in, the blogging's wonderful
From Sunday Times - 15/05/2005
Arianna Huffington

Blogs are the future of news, says Arianna Huffington, who is setting up 'a cultured conversation' on the web

I've been a fan -and an advocate -of the fast-moving blogosphere ever since bloggers started leaking juicy American political stories that wouldn't be touched by the chummy DC press corps. Simply put, blogs are the greatest breakthrough in popular journalism since Tom Paine (the original, not TomPaine.com, which is also great).

Lots of good stories get covered by newspapers and TV but, too often, there's no follow-up. Reporters for the big media outlets are always moving on to the next hot get. So, in America, having 500 channels doesn't mean we get 500 times the examination and investigation of worthy news stories. It means we get the same inch-deep, narrow conventional-wisdom wrap-ups repeated 500 times.

Paradoxically, in these days of instant communication and 24-hour news channels, it's actually easier to miss information. That's why we need stories to be covered, re-covered and covered again, with each person adding something to the last person's coverage -until they filter up enough to become part of the cultural bloodstream.

Almost every blogger works alone, but it's their collective effort that makes them so effective. They share their work freely and, because blogs are ongoing and hourly, bloggers will often start with a small story, or a piece of one -a contradictory quote, an unearthed document, a detail that doesn't add up.

Then there is the open nature of the form -the links, the research made visible, the democratic back and forth, the open archives, the big professorial messiness of it all. It reminds me of my schoolgirl days when providing the right answer wasn't enough for our teachers -they demanded that we "show our work". Bloggers definitely show their work. It's why you don't just read blogs, you experience them. You engage with them.

As someone who has spent her adult life toiling in the worlds of book and newspaper column-writing, where the Aristotelian verities of beginning/middle/end are the Rosetta stone of structure and form, it has been utterly liberating to find a place where the random thought is honoured. Where a zippy one-off is enough to spark a flurry of impassioned replies. And where reaching the climax too quickly -or too slowly -is okay.

All of which has made the blogosphere the most vital news source in our country - and has made me decide to take a flying leap into it with The Huffington Post. Our idea is to combine a breaking news section with an innovative group blog where some of this country's most creative minds can weigh in on topics great and small, political and cultural, important or just plain entertaining.

Ever since college I have enjoyed facilitating interesting conversations, around dinner tables, or at book parties, or on hikes with disparate groups of friends.

With The Huffington Post we're taking those conversations -about politics and books and art and music and food and sex -and bringing them into cyberspace, which is where so many of us spend so much of our time these days.

Also unlike the gatherings of old -where the conversations, bons mots and repartee unleashed would evaporate as soon as the guests went home -the thoughts, jokes, ideas, photos, videos and insights being shared on The Huffington Post are archived, open to be reviewed, revisited, shared, linked to, and commented on by everyone.

This week you might come in for David Mamet instantly "reviewing" theatre critic John Simon's departure at New York Magazine: "In his departure he accomplishes that which during his tenure eluded him: he has finally done something for the American theatre." You can see why he might feel this way, because we link to Simon's bare-knuckled review last week of Mamet's revival of Glengarry Glen Ross.

Then there's Quincy Jones with an entirely different take on the Michael Jackson case.

Blogs are only just catching on in Britain but, believe me, they'll change your life.

*www.huffingtonpost.com

Copyright 2005 Times Newspapers Limited

Date: 15/05/2005

My Photo

Welcome!


  • Welcome to CitizenSpin. I’m Matt Foster, and this is a weblog devoted to managing corporate reputations online. CitizenSpin is about shaping corporate communication strategy, using the tools of online communication and the blogging community. For public relations the frontier territory of the Internet is providing challenges and opportunities: citizen journalists, blogs, podcasting, consumer relations. My background is as a professional communicator working as a journalist and producer for both broadcast and print media here in London. Feel free to browse through and add your comments. Matt

More on Matt

SIGN UP ...

PR & People

RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS

Those who lost thier jobs