Tuesday, May 11, 2010

Live blogging the Free Press Summit (Regular Updates)

Remember, you can (as I am) watch the Summit online at http://summit.freepress.net/#.

1:42 p.m.: Pose this question to the American public: Would you pay a monthly tax (say $10) in order to ensure better, more informative and less opinionated news coverage? Now, be honest...what percentage do you think would say yes? (And I admit this is but one way -- and perhaps not even the best one -- to get us thinking about delivering better news and information to the public.)

1:15 p.m.: As I watch the BBC's John Tate speak, I am reminded of the phenomenal job the BBC did in reporting last week's election results. I watched perhaps 2 hours of the online coverage, and it offered more depth, more analysis and more timely information than I see on U.S. networks on election nights. I also am reminded that the BBC went uninterrupted -- yes, no interruptions to its reporting of Britain's elections.

That kind of commitment to news and information is one that we should be expecting and demanding of our media. But if they remain beholden to corporate interests, ratings and making money, then this cannot happen.

12:50 p.m. You WANT to do this -- http://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-lock-down-your-facebook-profile-2010-5 (Facebook and your privacy)

12:35 p.m. Link to Commissioner Clyburn's address provided below (see 11:01 a.m. post)

11:50 a.m. A relevant comment from a fellow online watcher --
Ladies and Gentlemen, I thought this summit would cover issues that will or likely to shape the future of journalism, public media and the Internet but attending since the outset it appears so be overwhelmingly focused on the new media and digital technology to the exclusion of public media which includes PSB.

11:35 a.m.: This hour's forum began with the moderator acknowledging that he thought it was a fantastic time to be in journalism. I couldn't agree more. Consider the technological improvements of the past 10-15 years (which is a lifetime for technological advancements) that have allowed for an interaction between journalist and audience that was not possible before.

At the same time, these improvements allow journalists to have more control over their work. No longer does their livelihood have to be tied to a mainstream media organization (and considering how those jobs are disappearing, we can be thankful for that).

11:01 a.m.: Commissioner Clyburn started slowly, and it appeared she was nervous. But as she got into her message, she delivered a powerful reminder that the culture of Washington is one in which too much discussion takes place inside the Beltway. She reminded everyone that the FCC cannot meet people in every small town and big city, and she's correct; however, the FCC ought to consider a robust online discussion about broadband, net neutrality and the other points she raised.

11:00 a.m.: FreePress says it will archive all presentations later today; I'll attempt to post links to the speeches when possible.

10:56 a.m.: Commissioner Clyburn makes some important points. But I remain concerned that the political climate is not pushing for much of what she is talking about, and the MSM have no vested interest in "covering" this story

10:43 a.m.: Didn't realize that Mignon Clyburn, speaking now at the Free Press summit, is the first female African-American FCC commissioner.

10:35 a.m.: How many people generate a financial benefit from owning media stock? Now, how many people generate a knowledge benefit from a vibrant media that act as watchdogs, cover business, etc?

10:31 a.m.: Free Press founds Josh Silver is spot on -- deregulation and failed government oversight are at the core of what is happening to our media environment

10:25 a.m.: Opening address from Alberto Ibarguen, who is President and CEO of the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation

10:20 a.m.: An interesting question from a fellow online viewer: [Comment From Shiv Satchit Shiv Satchit: ] I am particularly interested in the present role of public service broadcaster. Is the concept still valid or is it an anachronism? And here is my response: [Comment From Anthony Anthony: ]
SHIV: Yes, such journalists still matter. But in a climate in which advertising and ratings are perceived as more important than quality of information, the public service broadcaster suffers.

No comments: