Searching dirty

Librarian Genie Tyburski teaches an online class through the University of North Carolina on web research.

Sounds dull and dry, right? Uh, no.

Try, for example, using some of her suggested search terms on Google to find stuff that people don't want you to find:

• "not for public dissemination"


• "not for public release"


• "official use only" (variations include FOUO and U//FOUO)


• "company confidential"


• "internal use only"

For Genie's class, I tried some of these search terms combined with *NC*. I found a local political candidate's profile, with his home phone number, marked "not for public release."

That's one general theme that emerges from Genie's class: Information that is supposed to be private can sometimes inadvertently leak onto the web, through careless coding, or scanning, or editing, or incorrect placement on a server.

We've debated in class the legality and ethics of finding such information, and concluded that using the tools to find such information fall into legal, ethical realms like much of the reporting labeled "investigative." The ethical questions get sticky when you weigh what to do with the found private information.

Regardless, Genie's tools should be familiar tools for reporters and other journalists. Read her article and play around with the search terms sometime.

And check the updated "Reference" sidebar here for links to other resources, including Power Googling.

Finding election information

So you're looking to study up before voting? Or do you just need to check something that you're editing?

The Charlotte Observer's vote guide is here.

The Raleigh News and Observer's election coverage is here.

Indyweek.com, the website for The Independent in The Triangle, has election information here.

The League of Women Voters has PDF documents covering state and local elections here.

The Mecklenburg Board of Elections has early voting information and other stuff here.

You can also check the links in the "Politics" sidebar. If you have suggestions of links to add, please comment.

And while you're surfing elsewhere, beware. Lookalikes and wannabes proliferate. For example, you can get great information at FiveThirtyEight, but do not confuse it with 538.com or 538.org. At 538.com, it'll prompt you to download special toolbars for access to maps. Don't do it!

Help from the academy

Ryan Thornburg of UNC poses some questions for discussion at his blog, "The Future of News," about how universities can help newsrooms. His questions stemmed from a panel discussion at the Online News Association's recent meeting.

Unfortunately, the panel discussion had morphed into a session of preaching to the choir, with most people in the room being from academia, instead of being working journalists who could learn from academia.

Too often, working journalists tend to see academic people as falling into two camps:
1. Isolated, slow, behind-the-curve ivory-tower inhabitants, or
2. Incubators for products that have to be pitched like all the other vendors competing for our dwindling dollars.

As Ryan Thornburg quoted Paul Volpe, the deputy politics editor at washingtonpost.com:
“Pitch me.”

Unfortunately, with that approach, the transaction becomes all about the sizzle and not about the steak. Many of us have had experience with stories that landed on 1A not because they were good, but because they had a good sales pitch in a meeting. And many of us have had experience with software that landed on websites not because it was good, but because it had a good salesperson.

And then let's go back to No. 1 for a moment: Many of us have had experience with journalism classes that taught out-of-date skills or that were staffed with professors unaware of new technical developments.

But a middle ground exists. As we all deal with sad, sad news of losing good colleagues or jobs, academic works can help us remain focused on the long view. And academic research can give us independent views on business models, trends, staffing and management. That's quality information that can fuel important decisions.

So if you need to be reminded of what we're all trying to do, go back and read Phil Meyer.

If you need research information into attitudes, skills and diversity among staffers over time, check out the Newspaper Research Journal.

If you're looking for information on new technical developments, keep an eye on business incubators and information-related academic fields like online learning and information science.

Go give Ryan a comment on his blog. Give the academics a chance to help us.

And chin up, head down, ears open.

Send good thoughts for all.

Hurricane Twitter

The Biloxi Sun Herald twittered Hurricane Gustav. The Wilmington Star-News twittered Hanna.

Leslie Wilkinson twittered the July 30 earthquake in California. She was among the first in the nation to do so.

So obviously, news organizations and individuals are seeing the power in Twitter.

Plenty of examples exist on how to use it, and plenty of people have written about the mechanics.

So try it out. Create an account and follow some of these people to see what's going on: @ckrewson @robyntomlin, @andrew_dunn, @saragregory, @shanbow, @smalljones, @romustgo, @johnrobinson, @cnewvine (AP!), @rmathieson, @acarvin, @CNN_Newsroom, @SNOhurricane, and even @frankdeloache in Salisbury.

Read @andrew_dunn's case study of Twitter during Hurricane Gustav. Check how @ckrewson separates his "personal brand" from a professional brand at @PhillyInquirer. @KaylaC does the same separation in Charlotte with @WCNC.

Beyond those mechanics and examples exist some intriguing points about networks, community, professional and personal brands and separating the two, boundaries among parents and children and managers and employees, self-awareness, self-obsession, transparency, privacy, the Dunbar number (Google it), signal-to-noise ratio....

Start thinking about all that while reading Clive Thompson in the New York Times magazine on digital intimacy.

I could go on. But I won't right now, because I crave some real face-to-face community. But let's talk about it more. And try it.

A yellowed clip predicting the future

This old clip from The Pierce Report on Charlotte in 1995 gives a great history lesson on building community online. Steve Snow was talking about building links among people 13 years ago and struggling with funding questions. We're still discussing those questions.

Related links with lessons:

Dallas Morning News, 1999:

Freelance article on politics and funding, 1997.

Letter from Steve Snow offering sage advice.

Case study from the Charlotte library. "It's not about technology, but about people."

Gentle curmudgeon nudge

Goals with this post:
To be gentle, positive and collaborative, and yet to add a little perspective. Besides, sometimes I just can't keep my mouth shut.

Gary Nielson posted a link on his Facebook page to a story in The New York Times headlined, "TV networks rewrite the definition of a news bureau."

I beg to differ.

The story does have one phrase that seems to show that someone in the writing and editing process was aware that this kind of shoestring journalism has been going on for a long time (Hemingway in Paris, anyone?). Here it is:

"Though the style of reporting has existed for years, it is being adopted more widely as these reporters act as their own producer, cameraman and editor, and sometimes even transmit live video."

I respectfully, and gently, suggest that perhaps someone should have asked for a reworking of the top of the story, and an elimination of some words like "newfangled" and "new breed."

Instead, the story would have been more valid if it had taken the approach that new tools allow this kind of reporting to be much faster, cheaper and visual. Imagine some quotes, too, from a reporter like The Observer's Steve Lyttle, who was a one-man band with a typewriter and film camera many moons ago in the Monroe bureau. He's adapted and now reports online.

That example would invalidate phrases like this one: "Old-school journalists may bemoan the changes. ..."

On the contrary. If a return to the lean-and-mean reporting structure pre-1980s helps save journalism, I'm willing to bet one would find many old-school journalists who would embrace change and add their experience and skills. Let's stop this old-school vs. new-school dichotomy, which seems more damaging to journalism than the blogger vs. traditional media company dichotomy.

The reporter is about 23, according to Wikipedia (yes, he has a Wikipedia entry.) Being 23 is a great thing. But being 53 is also a great thing, and a little editing or seasoning of the story with some perspective would have presented a more valid picture. And perhaps it would have inspired others to embrace this "newfangled" reporting, instead of creating a "hogwash" reaction among the curmudgeon tribe.

In addition, the story perhaps implies that all this technology could eliminate the need for rewrite and producer positions back in the main office. Certainly it seems that many folks on the business side would like to think so. But take a look at the quality and success of Peter St. Onge's "Primary Source" blog during the May N.C. primary. Peter, essentially, was a rewrite man and a linker. And a darned good one, with 50,000 hits that month.

So let's try to be a little less breathless, and a little more seasoned. Experienced editors have perspective to add. We should add it.

It's something unpredictable

Three blogs, three young Carolina journalists.
You've probably heard of a couple of famous-in-the-blogosphere young journalists. These three aren't so famous, yet.
Check them out the next time you need a shot of inspiration. Some young people are intent on journalism's reinvention -- and its continuity.
Andrew Dunn, at "Breaks the News."
Sara Gregory, at "The Water's Fine."
Shannan Bowen, at "A (Young) Reporter's Notebook."