Here’s what you can expect in the coming weeks: why we need to start thinking about technology as journalism; the state of magazines in Oregon (a.k.a The Oregon Magazine Deathwatch); what we can learn from stupid Internet users; and a nonfiction piece on the youngest member of the Lincoln assassination plot.

Additionally, this Thursday I’ll speaking at the CASE regional conference in downtown Portland. My session is called “We Are the Media: You and the Emerging New Journalism“.

With the contraction of print and broadcast newsrooms, the media professionals we relied on for higher education coverage have started to disappear and so has their beat. Are there opportunities to become our own media with access and cost efficiency of the blogosphere, Twitter and other social media? As the digital revolution continues to reshape the journalism landscape, how is this changing the way we do our jobs? What trends and emerging journalism efforts can we expect to turn into mainstays of tomorrow’s journalism world?

As part of that I’ll also be posting a new media how-to guide for university administrators and teachers.

Over the course of the day about 50 percent of attendees left and didn’t come back. Many that I talked to said they didn’t see value in simply discussing the problems of the industry. Several people told me they felt like the day was an attempt by OPB, which was a sponsor, to “steal” innovative ideas that were generated by the journalism community. (I think that’s completely unfounded.) By the end of the day, I didn’t feel inspired, I felt exhausted.

Two days later my mood has improved. When I spoke to the audience as part of the opening panel, I said I was amazed by how the journalism community in Portland has come together over this last year. Yes, it’s very “Portland-y.” But the ways we’ve been exploring ideas and learning from each other is fundamentally important to the future of journalism in Oregon. And we clearly saw that happening on Saturday. Because of that, I feel like the day was an overall success.

But I’m going to leave why and how it was successful to other attendees to write about. Here are two things I believe the conference failed at on Saturday.

Diversity
Uncomfortable: That’s the only way to describe the atmosphere in the conference room when the lack of racial diversity was brought up. When the organizers were planning the event, we contacted media outlets we were familiar with. We failed to reach out to community media, and to media that reflected the racial diversity of Portland. This was a mistake, one that I take partial responsibility for.

We were lucky to have KBOO come on as a sponsor a few days before the conference. But what if that had happened a few weeks before? Who else could we have invited? And how would that dialogue have shaped the planning of the event? If we’re going to create a media organization that breaks out of the old news models, we need to be including people from outside traditional media outlets.

Technology
From the beginning of the day, the smartphone- and laptop-using crowd congregated in a back corner of the conference room. True, that’s where the power outlets were. But like minds found like minds — and they were in the minority. I’m not inferring that the rest of the attendees were Luddites. That clearly was not the case.

But the attitude of some of the core organizers was that technology, like the printing press, is simply a method to deliver the news. Wrong. Technology is journalism — from the code that creates new projects, to the tools we use to report and communicate, to ideas we are only now discovering. The cavernous gap between those two mindsets created an us-vs.-them mentality that drove some of the Twitter crowd into a frenzy. I’m not being critical of it; the heavy flow of snark on Twitter was hilarious and absolutely spot on.

But remember how I talked about a journalism community that’s coalescing? “The corner” wasn’t feeling it. And the project they gravitated to — an incubator for journalism startups — had little or no outreach or communication with any of the other final projects.

It’s two days later and I’m asking myself, “Now what the hell am I supposed to do?” I know I’m not the only one asking that. Over the next few days I’ll gather together answers from some other participants — and try and come up with one of my own.

–

Photo credits:
Binary: Carsten Mueller
Wrench: Davide Guglielmo

It was a weekend of contrasts. I came away amazed by some sessions and depressed by others. The conversation during the barcamp was so fast and sharp at times it was almost impossible to take notes; the new media sessions at the conference had a great range in topics as well.  Of course, there were also a few tedious veterans yabbering about “change.” I get cynical and bored with people who wave the word “digital” around like it’s some kind of healing wand without ever examining what has actually changed in our industry. Journalism students need answers, not aphorisms.

If there was one thing I took away from those two days it was this:

There are j school students out there who want more than what their universities are providing. And we may be loosing some damn good journalists because of it.

That’s not a crack at the U of O. In fact, they’re probably the most proactive university I know of. They recently changed their curriculum so that students get more hands-on training earlier in their studies. Several professors and instructors — including Ed Madison, Michael Werner and Suzi Steffen — were an integral part of the barcamp. Additionally, the university’s journalism department has been a strong supporter of community events like the Digital Journalism Camp and We Make the Media conferences. (Disclaimer: I am involved with organizing both events.)

But the reality is that as easy-to-use blogging, video, audio, programing and other digital tools increases, the number of students entering college with some type of skill is increasing as well. That doesn’t mean that a university can teach all incoming students at a higher level. It means the university has to serve a broader spectrum of students. With, of course, limited resources. Some students, like entrepreneur Daniel Bachhuber for instance, aren’t being challenged enough and they’re dropping out. That’s a tragedy not just for the school, but for the j school students who could be learning from their advanced-level peers.

One solution is to improve existing internship programs. Challenging, real-world work experience isn’t guaranteed to keep students in school, but it’s a significant start. Students at the barcamp had plenty of suggestions: Give us opportunities to add things to our portfolios, training that reflects what’s actually happening in journalism, and work that respects our time. But new journalism startups also need to start creating internship programs. J school interns are not just a source of cheap labor — they’re the talent pool you’re going to be drawing from as you grow.

--Members of the White House News Photographers' Association, circa 1922-1926--

As journalists, the future looms so large that it feels like we’re constantly on new ground. But we’re not. Whether we tell stories with words, audio, video or a combination of all three, there are a surprising number of lessons to be found in the past. A 115-year-old slice-of-life story about a sick man falling down on a city street has the same emotional power we’re looking for in our own stories. A 28-year-old story about engineers designing a computer has a staying power we’re hoping for in our own tech reporting.

There’s another lesson that’s buried in these stories from the last two centuries. It may be the most important. If you want to create quality journalism, the most important thing is to stand up from the keyboard, walk outside with whatever tools you like best, and start reporting.

1: You can report on technology in a way that it remains compelling — and relevant — for decades afterward.
“The Soul of a New Machine,” Tracy Kidder, 1981 [Google Books]

In the late 1970s, Kidder followed a team of engineers at a company called Data General Corporation as they frantically tried to design a new computer model. It’s a topic that could easily be confusing and dry. And 30 years later it seems like ancient history. But it’s not. The story is still a great read. Kidder took great pains to keep the technology understandable. And while the equipment is now quaintly archaic, the story around it — a crushing race to build a product that appears doomed to fail — is fascinating. “Soul” went on to win the Pulitzer Prize and the American Book Award.

2: Don’t be afraid to get close to the action, whether you’re recording with a notepad, recorder or camera.
“When Man Falls, a Crowd Gathers,” Stephen Crane, 1894 [PDF]
“Can’t Get Their Minds Ashore,” Abraham Cahan, circa 1898 [Google Books]

“When Man Falls” is slice-of-life reporting, not hard news. A man walking on the street falls over in what looks like an epileptic fit; a leering crowd gathers and waits for police and an ambulance. “Ashore” has a similar feel. Cahan is the invisible scribe as he follows a series of conversations at a receiving station for new immigrants in Manhattan. We’re no strangers to up-close journalism these days, whether on a battlefield or a crime scene. But Crane and Cahan are two great examples of reporting that gets close enough to see the smallest details, but not so close as to overshadow the story as it unfolds.

3: If you play with language, with storytelling, never forget the journalism at the core of the story.
The Pig, Ben Hecht, 1921 [Google Books]

“The Pig” is a brilliant example of voice done right. In the last forty years, there have been a few dozen print journalists who fall into that same category of “voice done right”: Joan Didion, Tom Wolfe, Hunter S. Thompson, Ryszard Kapuscinski, Susan Orlean. The examples of voice done poorly feel countless. If you allow a strong voice in your work, remember this: Journalists have been trying and failing miserably at it for more than 100 years. Do your homework. Learn how the masters got it right.

4: Sometimes you’re part of the story. Your honesty, not your ego, is what’s most important.
“How Do You Like It Now, Gentlemen?” Lillian Ross, 1950 [New Yorker archive]
“Travels in Georgia,” John McPhee, 1973 [New Yorker archive]

The “I”, the first person, is a firmly entrenched element of modern journalism. The “I” can add a crucial character to a story, one that guides readers with an invisible hand. Done poorly it’s an exercise in vanity. Ross’ profile of Ernest Hemingway is a great example of the “fly on the wall” reporting style that made her famous. In “Travels,” McPhee hangs out with biologists as they do field work and occasionally eat roadkill. The “I” in each of their stories is a remarkably unobtrusive but essential voice.

5: Profiling everyday people will always be powerful.
“Court Buff,” Mark Singer, 1980 [Google Books]
“Watercress Girl,” Henry Mayhew, 1851 [Link]
“The Rivermen,” Joseph Mitchell, 1959 [Google Books]

Singer wrote about courtroom spectators. Mayhew wrote about a child living and working in incredible poverty. Mitchell (and his contemporary A.J. Liebling) spent his entire career writing about supposedly unremarkable people. “I actually believe deeply in the dignity of ordinariness,” Susan Orlean once said. Orlean wrote what I think is one of the best profiles ever crafted, a study of a 10-year-old boy (“The American Man at Age Ten“).

“An ordinary life examined closely reveals itself to be exquisite and exceptional, somehow managing to be both heroic and plain,” she wrote in 2001. “I really believed that anything at all was worth writing about if you cared about it enough, and that the best and only necessary justification for writing any particular story was that I cared about it. The challenge was to write these stories in a way that got other people as interested in them as I was.”

-Photo credit: Oliver Ingrouille-

I’m posting this a little belatedly. Ok, really belatedly. Over at the conference site I have a schedule for Aug. 1, as well as list of some of the presenters, panelists and moderators. I just added Carolynn Duncan, founder of the startup incubator Portland 10, to the list. Her presentation is called “Square peg, wrong hole: Why your news product doesn’t meet consumers’ needs.”

Big room:
9:30-10: Introduction
10-11: Hyper-local news: What works and what doesn’t
11-12: SEO for journalists: What, why, and unique challenges
12-1: Lunch
1-2: Digital storytelling
2-3: Licensing your work: a.k.a, What the heck is Creative Commons?
3-4: Real-world successful (and almost-successful) revenue models

Room #2:
10-11: Square peg, wrong hole: Why your news product doesn’t meet consumers’ needs
11-12: Journalism basics: Understand sourcing, fact-checking, corrections
12-1: Lunch
1-2: Video 101: cheap software and editing tips
2-3: Podcasting and audio journalism
3-4: Wikipedia for journalists

Room #3:
10-11: Unconference
11-12: Reserved for caterers
12-1: Reserved for caterers
1-2: Unconference
2-3: Unconference
3-4: Unconference

Here’s a few of the panelists and speakers you’ll find at those sessions:

Cornelius Swart, editor, Portland Sentinel
Ken Aaron, NeighborhoodNotes.com
Justin Carder, Neighborlogs
Ginger Grant, director, Creative Intelligence Laboratory, Simon Fraser University
Paula Holm Jensen, attorney, Holm Jensen Law LLC
Rachel Andersen, Anvil Media
Lisa Williams, Media Forte Marketing
Greg Swanson, former director of interactive media sales for Lee Enterprises; founder of ITZ Publishing
Alex Wilhelm, co-founder, Contenture
Michelle V. Rafter, journalist
Carolynn Duncan, founder, Portland 10
Aaron Weiss, producer, KGW
Mike Gebhardt “Dr. Normal,” producer, Strange Love Live
Ethan Lindsey, OPB journalist- Our thoughts go out to Ethan and his family. For more on his health, visit http://www.caringbridge.org/visit/ethanlindsey/journal

Stay tuned in the coming days as we announce the final list of participants and moderators.

AND DON’T FORGET TO SIGN UP. Space is limited and the RSVP list will be CLOSED on July 27.

Sarah Palin: Wow.

Theory 1: Since she’s not running for reelection, why not use the time to fundraise and raise support for a presidential run instead of just sitting around as a lame duck governor? A similar theory says that instead of president, she’s going to run for the senate against current Alaska senator, Republican Lisa Murkowski.

Likelihood: Possible. She’s hit a political brick wall in Alaska. She doesn’t have a lot of support from the Legislature. The economy is crashing and she doesn’t want to be a governor who raises taxes. The GOP is desperate for a national leader and she could easily fill the void; up until last week polls clearly showed she’s popular among conservatives. As for the senate, there’s no love between her and Murkowski. This was the senator’s one-sentence statement yesterday: “I am deeply disappointed that the governor has decided to abandon the state and her constituents before her term has concluded.”

Chance of success: Lukewarm. Here’s why: a) Romney doesn’t have a day job and to keep up, Palin needs to hit the 2012 trail right now. Right? Wrong. And not just because it’s possible to run a state while campaigning. It also has to do with how much experience you have when you step down to join the race. As Bruce Reed points out, ex-governors like Carter, Reagan, Clinton and George W. either termed out or had served multiple terms before running for president.

b) The Nixon argument. After Nixon lost the 1960 presidential and 1962 California gubernatorial elections, he gave a bitter, angry speech (a.k.a the Checkers Speech), and seemed destined for political exile. He spent the next six years traveling the nation and world rebuilding his — and his party’s — status as a foreign affairs leader, and went on to become president. Palin isn’t Nixon. She doesn’t have his knowledge of foreign affairs, or his brilliance as a political strategist. Or six years for that matter.

Theory 2: Rather than jumping straight into a new campaign, she’s going to turn herself into an even bigger political superstar (and make lots of money) by writing books, getting her own show on Fox, sitting on corporate boards, and traveling around the country speaking at lucrative speaking engagements.

Likelihood: Possible. The opportunities abound.

Chance of success: Unknown. She’s thrown even her most ardent supporters into a tailspin. Conservatives4Palin.com: “All of us in the Palin camp have found quicksand beneath our feet today. Nobody knows what to think.” How much will they pay to hear her talk? She’s going to have do some serious work to win them back. See also Theory 5.

Theory 3: She’s pregnant.

Likelihood: Um.

Theory 4: She’s facing a federal indictment of some kind. The rumors of an actual indictment are just that. The facts that may lead up to that indictment are, on the other hand, pretty solid. At the center of the case is a building contractor called Spenard Building Supplies. The Village Voice did a in-depth investigation last year; Max Blumenthal has a new roundup:

Likelihood: Completely unknown. This is based entirely on unverifiable comments by off-the-record sources. Yes, Palin has faced at least three separate ethics scandals in the last few years. But we’re not going to know anything about this one until the feds announce something.

Theory 5: She’s simply being her impulsive self.

Likelihood: Very high. Palin’s speech was weird. It was rambling and sometimes incoherent. It’s very likely she wrote it herself; the exclamation points (18 in all), oddly used quotation marks, and repeated ALL CAPS are not the hallmark of a professional speechwriter. Guess where her main spokesperson was at the time of the speech? New York City.

Chance of success: Very poor. Joe Gandelman: “Sarah Palin is again doing it her way — but the question is whether her way is on the same wavelength as America’s overall polity and the way the political system operates.” Friday’s announcement didn’t catapult her to a new level of politics. In fact it did the opposite. Her resignation, with all its uncertainty and caprice, has cemented the fact that this confusing and unpredictable person is the Sarah Palin we will always see, no matter how long she’s on the political scene.

To quote Nixon: “A man is not finished when he is defeated. He is finished when he quits.”

Ink spots in image by Paulo Correa

•Daily/Weekly Newspaper Clips
•Magazine Clips
•Consulting
•Bio and Resume
•Contact me

Alive In Baghdad is a collaborative effort between journalists in Iraq and the U.S. For the past four years they’ve been producing video stories about what it’s like to live in Baghdad. They cover a lot of the war- and security-related issues you’d expect. But they also cover a side of Baghdad you’ve never seen: the lives of gays and Christians, the state of women’s rights, teenage soldiers, youth soccer, illegal pharmacies, what college students do to relax.

Right now Alive From Baghdad is hurting for money; they can’t afford to hire translators for their stories. This is a short video on just a few of the stories that Alive In Baghdad has done over the years. Even if you can’t support them financially, go to iTunes and subscribe to the podcast, or go aliveinbaghdad.org and watch some of the stories in the archives. It will change the way you think about the war, about independent journalism and about the Iraqi people.

Visit aliveinbaghdad.org to buy a t-shirt, make a voluntary subscription pledge of $5, $10 or $25, or to make a one-time donation.

Stop rolling your eyes — this is more than just a Twitter love fest. We talk about why journalists aren’t using it, why it’s changing how the PR industry views reporters, and why it really doesn’t matter if Twitter blows up and disappears in the next few months.

On this week’s show:

• Angela Dice, @adice, web editor and food blogger at the Kitsap Sun.
• Seth Long, @sethlong, director of new media at Sound Publishing.
• Silas Lyons, @silaslyons, editor and VP of new media content at the Record Searchlight.
• Stephanie Stricklen, @stephstricklen, anchor at KGW.
• Dick Hughes, @dickhughes, editorial page editor at the Statesman Journal.

You can subscribe to this this podcast via iTunes, or you can subscribe to all stories on abrahamhyatt.com by following the rss feed.

Thanks for listening.

If you’re coming, or even if you just think you may be coming, follow these step:

Step one: RSVP.
Step two: Fill out the survey.
Step three: Join the conversation about the conference agenda on Twitter (use the hashtag #journopdx), Facebook, or at journopdx.wordpress.com.
Step four: Buy a ticket.

Digital Journalism Camp Portland
Aug. 1
9:30 a.m. – 6 p.m.
$10. FREE
Lunch and light breakfast provided.

New location:
The Oregonian
1320 SW Broadway
Portland, Oregon 97201

CubeSpace
622 SE Grand Ave
Portland, OR 97214

Photo by Erik Hersman.