"What We Heard, What We Need"

[Rebecca Robinson]

this post from CUNY's New Business Models for (Local) News conference
seems apropos in the wake of #wmtm*, especially in the way it not only
summarizes what was discussed but also lists brainstorms and -
crucially - next steps:

http://newsinnovation.com/2009/11/19/next-steps-what-we-heard-what-we-need/

What did we hear? What do we need? Let's do this thing.

-Becca
*#deargodimthinkinginhashtags

[Michael Andersen]

Great catch, Becca.

There was some talk in the "small networks" group about the need for legal advice for small news operations. I'd forgotten then about the new Online Media Legal Network:
http://www.niemanlab.org/2009/11/need-a-lawyer-new-network-gives-web-publishers-a-line-of-defense/

"For-profit organizations that make less than $100,000 gross annual revenue qualify for pro-bono assistance, as do nonprofits with operating budgets under $250,000."

Wow. So maybe we can cross "legal" off our local to-do list for now.

Like Becca, I really like that list at the bottom of the NewsInnovation post. Here are three possible ways forward for Libby's incubator/exchange/co-op/collective concept:

1) A few of us could volunteer to each interview someone from another such professional co-op, asking:
- How did you start?
- How are you managed?
- What services do you provide?

2) Those of us who are already in small news operations could sound off on what they would personally look for from a collective, and then we can decide what'd be needed to fill each need

3) We could just use the list at the bottom of the NewsInnovation post and start figuring out how to meet all those needs.

Here's my suggestion: I move that we compile a list of other possible next steps, then talk about them at next week's JournoPDX-SPJ social hour at the Rose and Thistle, 2314 NE Broadway St.

(I also move that no hands shall be raised. Do I have a second?)

Michael

[t.a. barnhart]

i do so enjoy groups where the most aggressive/thoughtless speakers run roughshod over everyone else.

informal, fun gatherings are one thing; groups where ideas are meant to be shared are another.  if people can't be polite, they need to be treated as they act: like 3rd graders (who actually know better than to talk over everyone else all the time).

t.a.

t.a. barnhart
portland, oregon
503.757.5834
tabarnhart.net

[Michael Andersen]

Sorry, T.A. I intended to be making fun of the whole "voting" bit at the end of Saturday's event, not to the idea of raising our hands while we're in actual conversation.

I appreciated your own patience with hand-raising in Saturday's small-networks group.

Michael

[t.a. barnhart]

ah. sorry.

the hand-raising thing works really well as a means of weighted voting in a group setting; it's quick & relatively accurate. the problem Saturday was that we had poorly presented items to vote on - throwing them up on screen, in no order, without fully understanding each one -- there were 2 that seemed exactly the same, or at least one a subset of the other.  it's a good process but badly applied Saturday (despite Joe's best efforts - Joe is one of the very good guys, for those who don't know him).

t.a.

t.a. barnhart
portland, oregon
503.757.5834
tabarnhart.net

[Daniel Bachhuber]

Related to this, @seanblanda and gang have an interesting application
in for the Knight News Challenge:

http://www.newsinkubator.com/

--
Daniel Bachhuber
www.danielbachhuber.com
danielb...@gmail.com
cell: +1 971 998 5407
aim/skype/twitter: danielbachhuber

[Bill Lascher]

For what it's worth, I second the motion of discussing next steps at the journopdx-spj social hour, though I won't actually be there to participate. I will, however, try to come up with some ideas to contribute to that list.

Thanks Daniel for this link you sent about the News Inkubator. I think it is one model to consider. Discussions of business models and resources are important and they seem to be the priority for News Inkubator. On a somewhat superficial reading before I prepare to get on a plane, though, it seems like this effort is waited more to those business strategy sharing. To me, this seems like the point where such a project would be duplicative of the work already happening with journopdx and the SPJ. Discussions and coordination of marketing, promotion, business plans, mentorship, legal issues and so many other subjects are efforts that are well-suited for virtual spaces and online discussion.

I'm still pretty strongly behind focusing on physical workspaces and collaborative environments (I note the mention on News Inkubator of market-rate or below newsrooms). Social hours have a place, as do online discussions, and there's no reason any of this should be mutually exclusive. But right now, I still think thinking about opportunities for collaborative physical spaces that are not at bars, not at coffee shops and not at libraries should have a place on any list of goals we develop.

Yes, we need to consider business models and fiscal plans as we think about how to move sustainable journalism forward, but I think we should make room for a space to think about the actual journalism and work we're doing, that is, cultivating and improving the "product" we're trying to "sell," if, indeed, those are terms we need to use, and for a space to actually do that work.

Anyhow, I'll try to refine these ideas as time goes on, but I'd propose we think a lot about the type of resources and value a shared physical space offers.

Bill Lascher
www.lascheratlarge.com

[Alexander Craghead]

Examining the road ahead, I have a suggestion that might help us to
keep moving forward.

Model ourselves on the architecture of the Net. The Net is:
* Decentralized. It's a collection of many different tools and
services, not a single source.
* Collaborative. It is built around the idea of exchange.
* Cooperative. Nobody "runs" the Net. (See previous bullet point.)

What this means is that we shouldn't go down the road of defining an
incubator so narrowly that it has to be only one thing. There's a
strong support for the incubator being a social place like a journo
bar for the 21st Century. There's also a strong support for it being
an independent physical newsroom for journos. There's also some
interest in it being an online exchange of some kind. It can be all of
these things, and I would argue it *should* be all of those things.
Different journos will have different personality styles, different
needs, etcetera....

Likewise, we might develop a service that provides financial and
technical support, from co-op insurance to shared legal services to
technological help. There's no reason this has to be the same
structure that also provides the incubator space -- though it may have
many crossover members.

To put it another way, I use Flickr, Blogger, Twitter, and bit.ly
frequently. These are all separate entities, and the only impact that
has on me is that I have to have four different user/pw sets.

Combining some efforts under one identity umbrella -- such as the bar/
newsroom/online incubator -- is probably a good idea, but other
projects could easily become stand alone tools that allow journos to
opt in or opt out.

In short, we should aim at being a multi-faceted open community of
journalists, rather than being part of a single, large "hub"
organization that (tries to) solve all our problems.

~Alexander Craghead
http://www.civics21.org/

[t.a. barnhart]

not everyone was seeing the need for this, but a number of us were, and that is a space where we can gather to work.  if people wanted to just get out of their home/room/rut, or if they wanted to meet with 1 or 2 others for specific help, or whatever, then a working space (as opposed to social time or staying online) would be a great opportunity.

after the conference, i spoke with Jefferson Smith, and the Bus Project's offices (on SE 2nd, in the Tazo Tea building, just north of Yamhill) are available.  there's a open meeting/working area, tables to work together, space to work separately; plenty of power strips.  wifi.  maybe printers. a kitchen.  food & coffee places close.  lots of windows & natural lighting.  we might consider a voluntary contribution to the Bus, but what we are doing is the kind of thing the Bus supports.  all we need to do is decide when we might want to meet in a such way & see if that time is free.  we can give it a try for a while, explore how that works, and not have to make a commitment/investment in money, etc.

[t.a. barnhart]

i am not a journalist & never would pretend to be one.  i'm a political advocate (a deaniac), a poet and (anybody know any artists?) an aspiring graphic novelist.  i interview politicians, cover events, do research, etc; and then i spout my opinion.  i don't do news, i don't do investigative journalism, etc.  i opine.  maybe i'm selling myself short, but i'm more comfortable with the term "blogger" (and i'm not comfortable with that at all) than the j-word.  "tabarnhart.net" is an advocacy site, but i see myself wholly as part of this effort.

just not comfortable with the use of "journalism" as was too prevalent on Saturday (imo).  no biggie; just a perspective.

t.a.

(oh, and i agree on the 3 points. a good start for a working model.)

t.a. barnhart
portland, oregon
503.757.5834
tabarnhart.net

On Nov 23, 2009, at 11:13 AM, Alexander Craghead wrote:

Examining the road ahead, I have a suggestion that might help us to keep moving forward.

Model ourselves on the architecture of the Net. The Net is:
* Decentralized. It's a collection of many different tools and services, not a single source.
* Collaborative. It is built around the idea of exchange.
* Cooperative. Nobody "runs" the Net. (See previous bullet point.)

What this means is that we shouldn't go down the road of defining an incubator so narrowly that it has to be only one thing. There's a strong support for the incubator being a social place like a journo bar for the 21st Century. There's also a strong support for it being an independent physical newsroom for journos. There's also some interest in it being an online exchange of some kind. It can be all of these things, and I would argue it *should* be all of those things. Different journos will have different personality styles, different needs, etcetera....

Likewise, we might develop a service that provides financial and technical support, from co-op insurance to shared legal services to technological help. There's no reason this has to be the same structure that also provides the incubator space -- though it may have many crossover members.

To put it another way, I use Flickr, Blogger, Twitter, and bit.ly frequently. These are all separate entities, and the only impact that has on me is that I have to have four different user/pw sets.

Combining some efforts under one identity umbrella -- such as the bar/newsroom/online incubator -- is probably a good idea, but other projects could easily become stand alone tools that allow journos to opt in or opt out.

[becca]

I don't know if something like this already exists, but it might be
nice to have some sort of equipment co-op. I know there are arts
collectives where you can access photo equipment and such. Would be
cool if there was a shared space for journalists with computers with
Final Cut, maybe cameras, tripods, mics, and lighting equip. that
could be checked out. Maybe it could be combined with the physical
space that T.A. mentioned. Any thoughts?

Becca Pollard

[Alexander Craghead]

TA wrote:

>i am not a journalist & never would pretend to be one.  i'm a political advocate 

>(a deaniac), a poet and (anybody know any artists?) an aspiring graphic novelist.  

>i interview politicians, cover events, do research, etc; and then i spout my opinion.  

>i don't do news, i don't do investigative journalism, etc.  i opine.  maybe i'm selling 

>myself short, but i'm more comfortable with the term "blogger" (and i'm not comfortable 

>with that at all) than the j-word.  "tabarnhart.net" is an advocacy site, but i see myself 

>wholly as part of this effort.

>

>just not comfortable with the use of "journalism" as was too prevalent on Saturday (imo).  

>no biggie; just a perspective.

I see what you just described as "opinion journalism." However, consider all uses of the word "journalist" in my posts to be replaced by "journalist / freelance writer" if that seems more appropriate.

~Alexander Craghead
http://www.civics21.org/

[Libby]

Thanks for the link, Daniel. I think this goes well toward one of our
first objectives, which was mentioned in the session Saturday but I
don't yet see it up here -- find existing models and adapt them to our
own needs. I like the scale and guts of the proposal -- it's not clear
to me how they'll make money but they definitely have a lot of good
ways to spend it.
I've also heard that Publish2 is working on establishing a Northwest
news network to syndicate content from established publications. Might
there be a role for independent journalists in that as well?

Here's my suggested list of immediate actions:
1. Find a physical space (the Bus Project sounds like a good option)
and use it as a kind of base camp for expanding the network while we
provide a basic need that it sounds like a lot of people want.
2. Write up a basic mission statement and some ground rules -- the Net
rules is a good starting point.
3. Michael's suggestion -- split up duties and do some good old
fashioned research and brainstorming.
4. Write up a plan of attack, otherwise known as a business plan.
4. Start building alliances to meet our list of needs, whether it's
the Legal Network or Publish2 or OPB, Portland Media Lab etc.

Thoughts? I'll be at the digital journalism social hour next week to
help plan the next steps.

Libby

On Nov 23, 10:07 am, Daniel Bachhuber <danielbachhu...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Related to this, @seanblanda and gang have an interesting application
> in for the Knight News Challenge:
>
> http://www.newsinkubator.com/
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 7:26 AM, Michael Andersen
>
>
>
>
>
> <mike.ander...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Great catch, Becca.
>
> > There was some talk in the "small networks" group about the need for legal
> > advice for small news operations. I'd forgotten then about the new Online
> > Media Legal Network:

> >http://www.niemanlab.org/2009/11/need-a-lawyer-new-network-gives-web-...

> >>http://newsinnovation.com/2009/11/19/next-steps-what-we-heard-what-we...

>
> >> What did we hear? What do we need? Let's do this thing.
>
> >> -Becca
> >> *#deargodimthinkinginhashtags
>
> --
> Daniel Bachhuberwww.danielbachhuber.com

> danielbachhu...@gmail.com

[administrator PML]

Libby - sounds like a good shape on next steps