"He's Bonafide!"

Pardon me if I “rasp poetic.”

I am, obviously, a blogger. I was also, for about ten years, a journalist. For the past eight years, I’ve worked as a technical writer. I teach English. I’m completing the third revision of a novel, one of many I’ve written (no, I’m not published yet, but give me time). I feel the sting of typos to the point I scout my Facebook history and my blog looking for things that need to be fixed. And I fix them. And have been called anal retentive for doing so. But I will continue to do it. I have a bachelor’s degree in journalism and mass communication and a masters degree in English. I am, as they say in the vernacular, bona fide.

Also, I try to practice what I preach.

And one of the greatest lessons I’ve learned in nearly 20 years as a writer is that writers live in glass houses. And shouldn’t throw rocks.

But that’s a lie, of course. Writers throw rocks all the time. Writers should, however, have better aim. And more polished rocks.

Here’s a journalist throwing rocks at bloggers. As I read her screed, I’m not sure how to write my own. Context, I keep saying. Context. A journalist is supposed to provide context. As this journalist rags on a blogger for not writing as a journalist should, there’s no context. No link to the offending blog so we can judge for ourselves – and bless me, we would judge – the content of said blogger’s character. The old saw goes that if your mother says she loves you, you should check it out. So if this blog is so bad, let your readers check it out. Seeing the evidence for themselves will help them believe what you say.

As it is, there is no link. No context. So we’re left to judge the character of the judger.

I know. I’m throwing rocks.

Polished rocks.

Here’s her version of events, factually laid out (at least in part) contrasting with the unlinked blogger’s nonsense:

The Caldwell police responded to calls from local residents that they may have seen someone on the foreclosed lot next to their home. The house has been vandalized in the past, so the police set up bright yellow police tape.

"We want kids and others to know they can't just trespass," said Caldwell police cheif James Bongiorno. 

In order to help the problem, the chief added, the borough is reaching out to the owners to take immediate measures to secure the house so there is no easy access.

Hm. Much, much too wordy for starters. Here’s what a journalist should have done:

Caldwell police want trespassers to know they’re watching the vacant home at ADDRESS.

“We want kids and others to know they just can’t trespass,” says Caldwell Police Chief James Bongiorno. He said borough officials are trying to contact the vacant home’s owner to ensure trespassers can’t get on the property.

Neighbors called police DATE AND TIME when they noticed someone on the lot. The home has been vandalized in the past.

We don’t need to know about the bright yellow police tape, or that the measures will be “immediate.” This journalist says she likes to “rasp poetic” and that “[a]dding in that poetic or inspirational writing is the art in journalism but not every journalist has those creative bones and can spin their words to "weave that sticky web of an irresistable (sic) news story." Sadly, either you have that poetic eye - or you don't.”

I don’t know if she counts the police setting up bright yellow police tape as poetic or inspirational, or spinning words to weave that sticky web of an irresistible news story. But it’s not necessary for a police blotter item. Stick to the facts, and keep the poetry and inspiration in the features. Police stories need to lean heavy on fact – such as the location of the house and the time and date the complaints were called in. Now, I have no way of knowing if this excerpt is the full story or not – again, there’s no context provided. Maybe she did a better job in the full story. She doesn’t provide me with a way of knowing.

Perusing other writing under her name at Jersey Tomato Press, however, shows many other examples of the poetry and inspiration getting in the way of the facts.

Example:

As my own unused (for years) AOL sends out meaningless emails to contacts - that were deleted 2 years ago - and Target takes a giant sigh of relief after their giant hacking into their systems, Michaels Stores, a fun family-friendly (sic) arts and crafts home store, announced late yesterday they had been hacked.

What’s the news? Oh, the Michaels data breach. But it’s buried under the poetic inspiration. I don’t care that her AOL account was sending out meaningless emails. And her mention of the Target hacking makes it sound like the company was hacking its own systems. And if Michaels were a grumpy, adults-only arts and crafts home store, would she put it that way?

Example:

Acting Essex County Prosecutor Carolyn A. Murray announced today that the former Glen Ridge Borough Registrar of Vital Statistics admitted to stealing $82,981 from the Borough over a three year period.

Tresor Gopaul, 30, of Montclair pled guilty today before the Honorable Peter V. Ryan, Judge of the Superior Court, to second degree theft by unlawful taking.

Wow. Three very, very long titles in two short paragraphs. Here’s what a journalist would have done:

A former Glen Ridge Borough registrar pleaded guilty in superior court DATE to stealing $82,981 from the borough over three years.

Tresor Gopaul, 30, of Montclair, pleaded guilty to second degree theft by unlawful taking, according to Acting Essex County Prosecutor Carolyn A. Murray.

Who cares who the judge was? If the judge had something significant to say about the crime, then include his name and honorable title. Otherwise, it’s unnecessary information. It’s important that the guy pleaded (not pled) guilty. The rest of the information, including his title, can come later in the story.

The story has other problems – two individuals identified by the last name of Wells – is it the same person, or two Wells? The second Wells isn’t identified by title or by connection to the case.

And if you’re going to criticize bloggers, don’t write like a blogger. This piece just oozes blogginess. A real journalist would not continue to insert herself into the story, no matter how poetic or inspiration she might be feeling. She has a significant story here. She should step out of its way.

Yes, I know it’s easy to sit here and armchair quarterback news stories for a news organization that confesses in a blog post it has no copy editor. Just as easy as it is to armchair quarterback bloggers for doing what they do without really considering the blogger’s reach (probably very small) and their motivations (sometimes like looking into an empty room, yes, but more often than not they have a sincere desire to do something, whether it’s to share the news, feel involved, shout into the darkness or write scattered commentaries on the state of journalism versus blogging). It’s all relative.

I congratulate the Jersey Tomato Press on its willingness to work hard at journalism. But invest in an editor, as some of  your commenters have said. Someone used to editing newspaper stories. Then preach against bloggers all you want, after those rocks of yours are polished.

And yes, I took a butt-first exit from the industry in 2005. I don't claim to be a perfect journalist. I don't claim to be a journalist at all now. But I have my bonafides in professional writing, and I ain't afraid to use them.

Spotty Blogging

Blogging here at Mister Fweem’s Blog (and ancillary blogs owned and operated by Poop Soop LTD) is going to be spotty over the next two or three weeks as we complete a move of our corporate headquarters. We might say we’ll try to keep up with occasional updates and postings, but then again we’ve said that about our newest blog, Heinemakkefrau, since October and you’ve seen how well that’s worked out.

In other words: “Why must I fail at every attempt at masonry?”

We’ve simply got a lot to do over the next few weeks to get things ready to move into our new house and for the lady who bought our house to move in. Take yesterday, in fact – I spent several hours re-setting some tiles in the kitchen floor because the were coming loose. Got to finish that job this week. We’ve also got more packing and hauling to do. Not going to be fun at all. Add to that a drill at work on Thursday and a trip to the dentist Friday morning and the week’s stacking up with suckage.

Oh well. Stiff upper lip and all that.

Chickening Out

So I wrote a few days ago about finding a new book around which I could construct a blog.

I'm backing away from that book.

Why? Well, a few reasons. First of all, the author is still actively selling the book. That tells me it's still popular enough that she'll be engaged in constant vigilance against future attacks, following the example of W.A. Thornhump.

So, what are the other possibilities?

Oddly enough, I've tinkered with a blog about Richard Milhous Nixon, of all people. He's a fascinating individual, and not just because of that film Oliver Stone made about him. Also, because of things like this:

I've read a number of books about the man and have several more to go in the collection. But the scope of such a blog seems limited and a bit outside my more flighty approaches thusfar. So I will continue to think. And search for a new subject.

Goodbye, Blogger

So Google is going to re-brand Blogger within the next six weeks as it rolls out Google+, its Facebook rival and tries to become king of all that is social media.

Makes sense to me. As does the rebranding of its Picasa photo service which, frankly, is so buried as far as social media is concerned I’m only aware of it because I occasionally peruse my Picasa web album looking for photos I can re-use from previous blog posts.

Google Blogs, though. Well, I suppose Apple has its i-Everything, so why not a Google-Everything as well.

What’ll be most interesting is to see if the rebranding is also packaged with a push to join Google+, or if there will be compatability issues between the rebranded service and rival Facebook. I have yet to see Google+, but I hope that the Plus and Blogs remain distinct because, as far as I’m concerned, the blog and the social network aren’t exactly the same thing.

I like that I can customize my blog, for instance, giving it a distinct Mr. Fweem feel. And though I link many of my blog posts on Facebook, I’ve never looked at Facebook as a blogging tool, as when I go to my blog I want to see my stuff only (yeah, I can do that with a Facebook profile, but it’s not the same. It’s all too short-coupled).

More than likely I won’t notice a thing. I didn’t notice, for instance, when they rolled out their “major overhaul” of Blogger earlier this year. Oh, I may have noticed a few conveniences, but nothing that really stood out.

Its A Blogger!

If you don't read Richard Thompson's Cul de Sac comic strip, you should. And of COURSE there's going to be a blogger puppet, complete with the messy hair and, I presume, smudged glasses.

I can imagine the blogger's lines right now:

BLOGGER: Hey, Princess! Did you read what Thingby McBigbritches wrote in the New York Times today? He's absolutely the dumbest guy on the planet! I really took him apart on my blog!.

PRINCESS: Uh-huh. Do you think these shoes make my feet look big?

BLOGGER: Ooh, shoe trouble, eh? I've got a solution for that! Just go to www.myblog.com/princess-always-fretting-over-shoes-i-could-barf and read all about it. . .

And so on.

Creator or Consumer?

One of the most stinging – meaning the most truthful – critiques of the so-called Blogosphere is that the vast majority of bloggers do not create original content. They may riff off of someone else’s content – commenting on a news article, say – but the “originality” quotient of most blogs is fairly low.

Dilbert creator Scott Adams today ponders the effect modern technology is having on creativity, and poses this series of questions:

Another interesting phenomenon of the iPhone and iPad era is that we are being transformed from producers of content into consumers. With my BlackBerry, I probably created as much data as I consumed. It was easy to thumb-type long explanations, directions, and even jokes and observations. With my iPhone, I try to avoid creating any message that are over one sentence long. But I use the iPhone browser to consume information a hundred times more than I did with the BlackBerry. I wonder if this will change people over time, in some subtle way that isn't predictable. What happens when people become trained to think of information and entertainment as something they receive and not something they create?

We’ve seen, I believe, the answer to that final question in society for at least the last several hundred years. True, modern technology is putting massive amounts of information at our fingertips for instant access, but until there are 48 hours in each day, until we have four-hour work days and until we have computers or smartphones permanently wired to our eyeballs and cerebral cortexes, the amount of information flowing our way means little – we can and do still choose how much of that information to consume.

And we’re still creating scads of stuff, just like Mr. Adams did on his Blackberry.

The bloggers as non-creators argument is funny coming from newspapers, because they function a lot like blogs. Like blogs, they create original content. And, like blogs, they use content from a lot of other sources. Ever heard of the Associated Press? Anyway, back to the topic at hand.

Example: We have a lot of comic books at home. Because they’re there, our kids have them out constantly, poring over them. We also have copies of “Diary of A Wimpy Kid” at home. Cartoons all over the place. They’ve lit a fire under our oldest son. He’ll sit and read the comics for a while, but then put them aside, get out paper and pencil and draw comics of his own. For hours. For much longer than he spends reading comics. He’s producing a lot more than he consumes. It’s not terribly original right now what he produces, but for a ten-year-old kid, he does occasionally have a flash of inspiration that leaves him with an end product that is his, original.

If he were not exposed to comics – if he were not consuming them – it’s likely he would not now be a budding creator of comics.

Another example: We have many Legos in the house. Our youngest son is constantly poring over the Lego magazines that come into the house, and, as a result, is constantly asking us to find instructions for him so he can build the latest Lego gadget. We don’t always have the parts he needs. But he improvises. As he consumes information and entertainment, he creates his own versions of the Lego models he wishes to build. And he’s happy as a clam – except when nobody will help him find the parts he wants.

If he were not exposed to information and entertainment coming his way courtesy of the Lego models he doesn’t have, his desire to create would be stunted.

We’re not the robot drones Scott Adams thinks we are. The act of consuming information and entertainment can and does result in the desire to create information and entertainment of our own. Yes, that desire arrives in greater and lesser degrees in people, but the desire does come. That most of the stuff created out there does not become known – is not repeated on the radio, published in a hardcover book or on the Internet somewhere – does not negate the fact that the stuff was created and born in the consumption of other stuff. For many, the information and entertainment consumed act as catalysts for the innate desire we have to create.

The act of creation isn’t limited or stunted by the amount of stuff we consume – but in the amount of time we lend or are allowed to lend to the act of creating.

Comments Are Now Working

Apparently the gremlins that were holding comment at bay at Mister Fweem’s Blog have gone back to their dank lairs, as comments that were approved are now appearing as they should. Maybe that’s not exciting to you, but we here at MFB are pretty chuffed, as this was a record week for comments. I think we got three.

Comments Malfunctioning

Blogger's commenting system seems to be malfunctioning at the moment. I await helpless as I try to figure out what's going on. In the meantime, if your comments aren't appearing, I apologize.

Legitimizing the Blogosphere

Bloggers.

Say that word in most newsrooms and you get sniffs of derision or jokes about the fat guy in his pajamas living in his Mommy’s basement or, at best, a concession or two that there “may be a few good ones out there,” but most of them are trash.

I’m firmly in the third category. Most of the blog posts I read, and certainly most of the blog posts I write, are throwaways. Little men and women with little minds sharing their little thoughts with a world that will get along just fine without what they think, thank you very much.

There’s no original reporting, some of the sniffers say. They’re just riffing off articles they’ve read. Like this blog post, naturally.

This is one riff you ought to read. Among many you ought to read, especially if, like me, you want to avoid the herd mentality that comes with any kind of group activity, be it reporting, Scouting, church-going or what have you.

Here’s a man thinking. Maybe his thoughts on most things aren’t worthwhile. But he has his Psycho Milt moments.

Psycho Milt is Internet pundit Clay Shirky’s answer to the newsroom and boardroom scoffers-at-the-Internet. Psycho Milt, in Shirky’s example, is an Iraqi war veteran who posted, at the time of the lecture, one photo on the photo sharing site Flickr pertaining to the war. One photo. He’s not a massive contributor. There are a few who have posted thousands of photos of the Iraq war on Flickr. Psycho Milt, just one.

But what if you really, really liked his photo? What if it were so telling of the war that it made it on the cover of Time magazine? Is the volume of Psycho Milt’s contribution to photojournalism as important as the potential impact? No.

Same with bloggers. Maybe, once in a blue moon, one of those pajama-wearing basement dwellers really has something interesting to say.

That’s the premise of Suzanne Smalley’s article at Newsweek, in which she outlines how, as a mainstream reporter, she looks to specialized blogs that treat on the same subjects as she does to inject a little skepticism into her reporting and to help insulate her from the herd mentality that exists among journalists. Read:

The summer of Chandra Levy seems like yesterday, though almost a decade has passed. I'd like to think I'm a better reporter now, less likely to follow the pack. More important, the media landscape has changed. Blogs barely existed in 2001. Now, when I cover any high-profile crime, I make sure to check out Web Sleuths, an Internet forum for armchair detectives who analyze cases and post court filings. When I followed the Duke lacrosse rape story, blogs—many written by people with expertise about North Carolina politics, the law, or even, say, protocol for forensic nurses collecting rape kits—were the best source for appropriately skeptical reporting. The herd mentality of the mainstream media still exists, but it is no longer in control of the narrative. That's a good thing.

Bloggers are unrestrained by the orthodoxies of the professional reporter. They don't need to follow the conventions of the 800-word newspaper story and can instead toss out an idea in two sentences that will nonetheless spur national discussion. They can ask questions without necessarily supplying an answer. Critically, bloggers also do not typically rely on official sources for information. Reporters and their anonymous sources both benefit from the relationship. Reporters get exclusive information, which earns them promotions; sources weave narratives that serve their interests. This corrupting symbiosis makes the reporter all too quick to take an official's word at face value.

There are legitimate arguments to be made that bloggers are not professional journalists. That I will concede. But many bloggers out there do not fit the article-riffing, pajama-wearing stereotype most in the mainstream press insist on slapping them with. There are legitimate experts out there blogging not in the expertise of journalism but in the expertises of law, police procedure, ethics, nuclear science, and other disciplines. What a treasure trove of informative sources for professional journalists to tap into, rather than deride.