I went on about the quality of journalism in a previous article of mine. Here I’ll show you how easy it is to actually do it yourself. I’m no journalist so this is not an exhaustive guide, but hopefully it should help you dig the facts out of stories in the MSM.

Through the power of the internet and open source and freely available services you too can double check the facts of an article, see how much work the journalist has put into the story and view the original source of the story too see if there was any bias in the article. And then you can do it yourself – but better.

The first part is probably the hardest, in terms of effort required not complexity. All you need to do is go to the companies, organisations, groups that are of interest to you and read their press releases. Put the websites of various news gathering organisations like Reuters into your bookmarks as well. Also read the blogs of anyone else who has an interest in the subject matter, positive or negative.

And if you’re really good you’ll get real life contacts as well who will get in contact with you off their own back to tell their side of the story.

You now have the stories to talk about.

The second part which raises you up above the rest of the churnalists is to ensure that you aren’t simply regurgitating press releases. That you are actually adding some original thought to your story. I mean, why should journalists get away with copying and pasting a press release when you aren’t allowed to do so at college. Churnalism.com shows you how others are getting in wrong so that you can get it right.

The hard part in reading press releases is to find out what they really mean. Many press releases are used to hide other information. For instance the real data might be hidden behind lots of gobbledy gook or in the depths of the report especially if the data is not a good story for the organisation.

Unless you get a scoop most of the time you will be covering the same story that dozens of other bloggers and journalists are already covering. However that shouldn’t stop you from saying the same stuff as someone else. Your readers might not be the same set of readers of the other person. Or they might be of the opposite view point from you. To be really good you should be able to talk about both sides of the story and let the reader make up their own mind. But many a time you will have a point of view and it easier to talk about that because you are familiar with it than the opposite.

To ensure that you are telling the story properly you need to make sure that your story is factually correct. Of course you can use wikipedia, but even there double check the facts as it’s been shown that even the top notch churnalists can use false and fake details. If the story is already out in the wild you can use fullfact.org to check if the raw data backs up the published story. Most of the time it doesn’t so you can write your story and debunk the main stream story.

I’m only a simple part time blogger, some of you are more full time. What tips and tricks do you use?

SBML

DIY Journalism is a post from: Anna Raccoon

A few days ago Anna reported on great and the good of the blogosphere (allegedly) holding an expensive conference to help goodness knows who cope with the phenomenon of bloggers, tweets and so forth.

Well, we may not have fancy conferences down here at the Abbey, but we can do better than that! Radio Gildas recently launched its late night confidential phone-in ready to deal with politics and personal matters alike, fearlessly taking on any problem. Aided by “Raccoonistas” Sister Eva Longoria and Randy Hack the results were predictably…odd, and a transcript of some of the best (or worst) of the show appears below.

[ABBEY TECHNICIAN IN WHITE COAT: RED LIGHT ON. CUE FANFARE MUSIC!]

GILDAS: Hello and welcome to the Abbey and our first live phone in! We have a trio of experts for you tonight, ready and willing to answer all your questions on all things, personal, political or blog related!

[CRASH]

HACK: Oh shit, I’ve knocked my drink over! All down m’pants dammit…

GILDAS: Indeed! Right, first, my humble self, part monk and part time blogger! Next, sitting on sitting on my left hand, we have our very own agony aunt and New Age guru, former glamour model and present day small arms instructor, Sister Eva Longoria!

SISTER E:Tra la la! [WHISPERS ASIDE] Here use this, mop it up dear…

GILDAS: (AHEM)….And to my right wit, raconteur, bon viveur and man about town, the Man in the White Suite, Randy Hack!

HACK: That should be my right hand you’re sitting on Eva (GUFFAWS)

SISTER E:(GIGGLES)

HACK: Let’s gets some more frigging Merlot. Hey! Where’s m’fags?

SISTER E:Have one of mine.

HACK: Ta!

GILDAS: Now our first question comes from “TB” of “no fixed abode,” who describes himself as a “Middle East Peace Ambassador.” Wow! Your question please, TB!

TB: Hello Gildas! Well yeah right…you know, I like to think of myself as a pretty straight kind of guy, but lately I’ve been getting a lot of grief off, you know, people who don’t seem to like me. Amazing, you know! When I was in power the journalists mostly seemed ok, but not those bloggers, and it’s getting worse. What I want to know is what’s the difference between a journalist and blogger anyway?

GILDAS: Great call TB! Randy, over to you.

HACK: Look I’m frigging parched. Is the Chablis all gone? .

SISTER E:This one’s open! (SOUND OF POURING – GLUG GLUG GLUG)

HACK: Thanks babe, I bet that’s not the only “bad habit” you’ve got! HAH HAH HAH!

SISTER E:(GIGGLES)

HACK: Right TB (SLURP) it’s like this (SLURP). A “JOURNO” is someone who pays you a bit of respect because he is scared he might get fired or you might have him killed and make it look like suicide like you did with that David Kelly bloke, whereas a BLOGGER is someone free to call it like it is.

TB: OH I SEE.. but I have to say that I deny that…

GILDAS: Good point Randy! Our next call is from “GB” of Fife, who describes himself as “a misunderstood saint and expert economist and a bit of a loner.” Over to you, GB of Fife!

HACK: What’s all thus white powder (SNORT)

GB: (THICK SCOTTISH ACCENT) Hello Gildas. My problem is I am very bitter and boring and I have no friends. So on the advice of someone we’ll call Mandy (I thought he was my friend but he wasn’t) I started a Twitter account. My wife Sarah has one and it’s very popular, I’m told and high in the ratings, but my Twitter rating is really low.

HACK: Wow, this is good stuff, man!

GILDAS: Please carry on GB of Fife…

GB: Well I’ve heard Sister Eva has a lot of followers on Twitter My question to Sister Eva is: how do I get it up?

HACK: (FNAAR! COUGH ! SPLUTTER!)

SISTER E:Well, GB, have you thought about being human as opposed to a miserable robotic killjoy?

GB: No, not really…

SISTER E:No, I thought not. I usually recommend chanting “Ohm, Ohm”. But for you it won’t work. I think you need “tough love”. In short bugger off before I shoot you in the head.

GB: Thank you, Sister, Those are the kindest words I’ve heard in years!

HACK: Hey! This Metaxa is nice…. (GLUG GLUG GLUG)….. ahhhh!

GILDAS: Large one over here please Randy! Now our next question is from the unusually named “iDave” who says he’s from London and Oxford. Well he does sound posh! Hello iDave, are you there and what is your question?

iDAVE: Yes Gildas I’m here. Great show! The problem is that I am indeed posh and all my mates are posh too. In fact everyone I know is very posh and stinking rich. I’ve got this idea for the “Big Society” but no one who isn’t posh and stinking rich is interested. Everyone thinks I’m just too posh! I feel it needs more publicity. I’ve tried a “WebCam-eron” but it didn’t really catch on. It was too posh! Have the panel got any ideas to make my web cam less posh and more popular?

GILDAS: Sounds tricky iDave. We are talking serious “spin” issues here. Have you tried taking your tie off?

iDAVE: Yes, I do that but I still look posh and condescending…

SISTER E:That’s a problem iDave. Have you tried getting pissed on Red Stripe, rolling your own and living on benefits?

iDAVE: It’s not really me…

HACK: I think I can help you here iDave! I hear your wife’s a bit of a MILF, as the kids say! Here’s what you do. Invest in a bit of a bit of cheap underwear from Ann Summers for the misses, move the web cam to the bedroom and get her to jiggle her constituencies about in front of it and talk dirty. She a posh girl too so she’ll be right up for it! You can call it the “Sam Cam” – hey, see what I did there! Set up a PayPal account and you can even help out the country’s finances at the same time. Tell you what, I’d pay for a quick chat and a w-

GILDAS: Thank you Randy! Hope that’s helped posh iDave over there in Oxford and London

SISTER E:(WISTFUL) Actually if that’s who I think it was I like quite like his misses. She’s my girl crush…

HACK: Really….?

GILDAS: Really….?

SISTER E:Yeah, her and that Alex Jones off the One Show. I mean you would, wouldn’t you…?

[SILENCE then sound of TALL drinks being poured]

GILDAS: Too much information there, I feel. Right, moving on now, our next caller is “Nick” from Sheffield, who I believe has some sensitive personal issues he feels he needs to explore. Welcome Nick, how can we help?

NICK: Well, it’s very personal indeed… and a bit embarrassing…

SISTER E:Don’t worry Nick, spit it out…

HACK: [SNORT] Words we so rarely hear!

[SLAPPING SOUND]

SISTER E:We’re still listening Nick

NICK: Well, I’ve been happily married for nearly 15 years, but…but lately I have found myself strangely attracted to a man…a man called Dave…

HACK: Reminds me, I need another fag! (SOUND OF LIGHTER) …

SISTER E:Do please go on Nick…

NICK: I didn’t mean it to happen. We were just thrown together in desperate circumstances. But I feel more and more that I love him. I want us to be together for ever and ever. I feel this connection…to power…when he’s close and supportive. And yet I feel he is using me…as if he’s getting ready to dump me when it suites him, but I like it…. Is this wrong? I know have been betraying people and living a lie but I can’t help myself!

GILDAS: Tricky one Nick, I feel this needs a woman’s touch. Sister Eva?

SISTER E:Well Nick, it’s important to realise that there is nothing to be ashamed of. From time to time we all like to dress up and play dirty games in which we are humiliated…

GILDAS: True….

HACK: (SOTTO VOCE) I can imagine…(SLURP)

NICK: [SOB]

SISTER E:…and cheat on those we have made solemn promises to…in our manifestos, for example…

NICK: [SOB]

SISTER E:…but it’s important to understand that you are human. No one here is judging you, you conniving two faced bastard. What I feel is that you need to have some BOUNDARIES. I like to have a special “SAFE WORD” that I can use to stop things getting out of hand. I think that might help you in the sick, vile, twisted, disgusting, sordid and unnatural relationship that you describe. A word which tells you both when it is time to STOP. I suggest “AV.”

NICK: That’s great Sister Eva. But how can I get him to take me roughly from behind?

SISTER E:Well, I find -

GILDAS: NEXT CALLER!

HACK: Just when things were getting interesting!

GILDAS: Let’s move on! Next up is “Jacqui” from Redditch. Good evening Jacqui. Jacqui, I hear that sadly you recently lost your job!

JACQUI: Hello Gildas. Yes, I have recently been made unemployed. Have the panel got any ideas what I should do to start my own business?

GILDAS: Well, Jacqui, are you any good at anything?

JACQUI: No

HACK: Are you good looking?

JACQUI: No

SISTER E:Are you a warm, caring individual?

JACQUI: No

GILDAS: Hmmm..tricky… Jacqui, do you have any materials readily to hand?

JACQUI: Yes, I’ve got this big stash of porn my husband bought on MP’s expenses

GILDAS: Great! Then re-invent yourself as a broadcaster and do a documentary about porn for the BBC. They’ll pay you shed loads of our money!

JACQUI: Brilliant!

GILDAS: Just time now to squeeze in a couple of quick calls be fore we go. First “Stephen the Speaker” from Westminster. Stephen, how can we help you?

STEPHEN:Hi all. I am very little and my wife is very tall and has a very big mouth. I have recently been appointed to a new post which involves shouting ORDER!ORDER! but I fear I may be unpopular. How can I spot trouble makers and time wasters?

HACK: They’re the ones on the green benches sitting in front of you.

GILDAS: Thanks Stephen, glad we could clear that up for you. Finally tonight is “President G” calling from Tripoli. Come in President G! How can we help you?

PRES G: I am BIG DICTATOR but lately my powers..they is waning yes? My peeps, they seem…rebellious…they is complaining a lot. OH MY HEAD IS FULL OF BEES! They write bad things on me on Face book, Twitter and internet forums! How can I be fighting this fire and controlling the peeps?

GILDAS: Have tried using the Presidential guard and the mercenaries?

PRES G: Yes!

HACK: Have you tried using the fighters and the helicopter gunships and the bullets we sold you?

PRES G: Yes!

SISTER E:Have you tried dressed up like something from London Fashion Week and made long rambling speeches?

PRES G: Yes!

GILDAS: Is none of it working?

PRES G: No!

GILDAS: Well basically mate you’re completely f-

[STATIC INTERRUPTION 1 MINUTE. BROADCAST RESUMES]

GILDAS: Well I think that went as well as could be expected in the end.

[CHINK CHINK CHINK]

ALL: CHEERS!

Cast list:

Gildas

Randy Hack

Sister Eva

Radio Gildas is a post from: Anna Raccoon

As I’m left holding the reins of AR I got to thinking about how I got into blogging.

I work in the computer industry so blogging, tweeting, facesitting, weren’t unusual terms for me. However I am of a certain age and experience that I don’t jump and get the latest and greatest or try out new fads as soon as they come out. I had an Internet presence in the 1990s and had a “home page” so I was there at the start, but I’ve grown out of all the techy stuff, not that I don’t like watching the Gadget Show on Five. An example – I’m laughed at for my phone, its not got a camera, no MP3, no games, no apps, nothing except the ability to text and make phone calls. So I didn’t look into this blogging malarkey thinking it as a place where only nutters go.

Having said that I have been quite opinionated for some time. Grumpy Old Men comes to mind, though I’m not that old. But I only had my family to vent my frustrations out on. I’ve been left leaning most of my life but as I got older and wiser I realised that the socialist ideals were full of ideals but no substance. Also as I got older and wiser the authoritarian attitudes of the socialists became more and more overbearing as I found that the best way to do things is to take responsibility for your own actions. I mean, if you make a mistake at work you take the hit, you don’t say that it was your manager’s fault. Likewise if you make a mistake in life you can’t say it was your government’s fault.

Another factor that made me head away from the left, but not the right, was science and it’s basis  - research. The process of checking everything and looking into the facts and figures of any story. So as I did this on many left success stories I found that it was only a veneer of socialism. Underneath there was nothing to back it up. Many of the figures would be cherry picked or alternatively ignored to push the socialism is great angle. When I looked into the background many times the truth was nothing like the story was told.

As the saying goes, “Not to be a socialist at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at thirty is proof of want of head“. When young the your emotion control your life, when older you naturally gain more experience and your head controls your life. So I have grown up.

It wasn’t until early 2010 that I first came across the term Libertarianism and realised that what it stood for is personal responsibility, common sense, little state, big society, self reliance, tolerance for others, and even family values. It doesn’t mean no advertising as some philosophers seem to think. Having just started my blog as a form of self release I still felt a bit self-conscious but as I left more and more comments on various blogs of all flavours and as I wasn’t told off for being a twat straight away I gained more confidence that I was thinking the right things. Then I found AR and saw the light! It was like a breath of fresh air amongst all the dry overtly political blogs whose only aim was to bash the opposite side but who are only preaching to the converted.

How did I end up helping run AR so quickly? Being in the right place at the right time basically and surviving a grilling from Anna as she checked me out! I’m not better than any of you, in fact AR runs on everyone being better than us authors as you can correct us, point out additional facts, and add detail. We only start you off with a topic of conversation. Along with Andrew Withers and Gildas and many others we are only the bartenders whilst Anna the landlady takes a bit of a rest. If you feel like submitting a story get in touch with us.

So why do you blog? You don’t need write your life story, but what kicked you into doing it? What made you angry enough to start, or are you just a plain egotist. How do you blog? At work or in the evenings? On a phone or laptop or desktop?

SBML

Why do you blog? is a post from: Anna Raccoon

Is Nick Robinson a blogger? Is Guido Fawkes a journalist? The Question has been hotly debated on the internet. Last week, for the first time, a New Jersey Judge dipped his toe into these turbulent waters, and arrived at a conclusion that is likely to reach accord with the judiciary on this side of the Atlantic.

In the case of  ‘Too Much Media’ LCC v Hale the judge was being asked to decide whether a journalist, whilst acting as a blogger, was entitled to rely on journalistic privilege, specifically the right to protect sources, and further whether someone defamed under these circumstances could reclaim damages without having to prove pecuniary loss.

Shellee Hale, the defendant, is a published author and a member of Society of Professional Journalism, The National Writers Union and maintains a corporate account with PR Newswire. The issue was not whether she was a journalist, but whether she was entitled to the privileges and protection (called the Shield Law in the case report) accorded to that profession when blogging on her own account.

“Courts are now being faced with the task of evaluating a virtually limitless number of people who claim to be reporting on issues, but who are, many times, doing little more than shouting from atop a digital soapbox. When New Jersey’s legislature enacted the Shield Law, it could not have anticipated the instantaneity with which people now transmit information. (Here at page 7)

There is no fact-checking required, no editorial review, and so little accountability for the statements posted that it is virtually impossible to discern the author or source of the posts.  To extend the newsperson’s privilege to such posters would mean anyone with an email address, with no connection to any legitimate news publication, could post anything on the internet and hide behind the Shield Law’s protections.  Certainly, this was not the intention of the Legislature in passing the statute.” (Here at page 9).

The judges decision, whilst not binding in the UK, will send a shiver down the spine of many a journalist who blogs in addition to his main employment, or perhaps following redundancy. The decision, as always, turns on its own facts, and cannot be taken as a blanket ruling that bloggers are not journalists unless employed by a bonafide news organization and are not then covered by New Jersey’s Shield Law, which legally protects reporters from disclosing their sources. However, taken in conjunction with the recent case of Nightjack (The author of a blog v Times newspaper [2009] EWHC 1358 (QB) where Mr Justice Eady refused to protect the anonymity of a blogger, it is an indication of how the judiciary on both sides of the Atlantic are attempting to draw a firm line between the rights and privileges accorded to those who work for the accredited establishment media, and the voices of the citizens that ‘shout from atop the digital soapbox’.

The second part of the decision is interesting, in that not only was the defamation suit bought under a head of Slander rather than Libel, which accords with Mr Justice Eady’s ruling in Smith v ADVFN & Others [2008] All ER (D) 335 (Jul) that in the context of defamation law, postings and communications of this kind are more “akin to slanders”. Mr Justice Eady said that such comments are “contributions to a casual conversation (the analogy sometimes being drawn with people chatting in a bar) which people simply note before moving on; they are often uninhibited, casual and ill thought out.” The distinction between the two causes of action is important because slander is only actionable if the claimant can prove special (monetary) damage caused by the imputation – however injurious to reputation, however malicious the motive of the defendant.

In the Hale case the Judge ruled that where she had alleged that the plaintiffs had ‘threatened someones life’ and ‘committed theft’ (of e-mail addresses) this came under the heading of:

One who publishes a slander that imputes to another conduct constituting a criminal offense is subject to liability to the other without proof of special harm if the offense imputed is of a type which, if committed in the place of publication would be (a) punishable by imprisonment in a state or federal institution, or (b) regarded by public opinion as involving moral turpitude.

[Restatement (Second) of Torts §571 (1977)]

and thus, because ‘the defendant’s message board postings allege that plaintiff’s have engaged in criminal conduct and are incompetent with respect to their business practices, the complaint is actionable without proof of pecuniary damages’.

In plain English, at the moment, this ruling only applies to those within the Washington jurisdiction, but if the cross fertilisation continues between the US and UK judiciary, as seems likely, and a similar set of circumstances is brought before a UK court, then bloggers will find that even if they are journalists ‘in real life’, then they are not covered by journalistic privilege when blogging or commenting on message boards, and furthermore those who comment on message boards are liable for comments such as ‘I will kill her’ or ‘he’s a thieving git’, even where no financial loss can be proved.

Blogger v. Journalist (Part IV) is a post from: Anna Raccoon

 I see blogging as the cyber equivalent of the role of host in the medieval ale house. Long before the advent of licensing regulations, the ale house was a private house, a place to gather in congenial company and exchange gossip and opinion. Customers made their choice of venue dependent on whether the host was interested in the latest results of ‘kick the pig’s bladder’ or the sexual proclivities of the Lord of the Manor. If customers became overly rowdy and aggressive, or perhaps had eyes that were fractionally too close together for his taste, the host reserved the right to unceremoniously toss them out of the door.

His house, his rules, his choice of conversation.        

There are a number of different conversations going on in the blogosphere today concerning the rise of the independent blogger, whether they represent a threat, and to whom.  Andy Burnham MP wants to put in place a system whereby some content, and by extension, some blogs, would not be available for general view. Where children are concerned that is fair comment, and it is right that children are excluded from the ale house these days. The suggestion that bloggers should be regulated as to their choice of conversation has created a firestorm of comment on the Internet and begs the question of why they should be seen as such a threat?

Professional writers are feeling threatened by the blogosphere, they have to fight to be heard alongside those of us afflicted with the Grocer’s apostrophe. It was their choice though, to enter the blogosphere. They already had their own closed shop where they effectively controlled the written conversation.

Yesterday I was invited to post a guest piece on Old Holborn’s riotous blog; it elicited a hilariously misspelt response denouncing my own ignorance of punctuation and grammar (I admit, I am useless and eternally grateful to my very own ‘apostrophe policewoman’ and her daily e-mails!), whilst admiring the:

‘sheer nerve it takes to share this drivel with others, as though it had merit, purpose, vitality, originality’

This suggests that there are cyberpeople within the blogosphere who wish to confine the right to blog to those professionally trained in the art of written communication, surely the philosophical equivalent of wanting to confine speech to the professional orator. 

I have sympathy with some journalists such as the inimitable Guidowho have chosen a blog as a way of highlighting political events that the Lords of the Media preferred to keep quiet; Jay Rosen had an interesting theory which I wrote about   discussing how and why journalists exclude some voices. It fails to explain the current moves to exclude some voices from the blogosphere.

Could it be that having entered the cyber world, politicians and their slave journalists dislike the ease with which their own voice can be lost in the madding crowd?

Kerry McCarthy MP, muses on his blog 

I do wonder though – as more and more people start blogging, will it destroy the sense of a blogging community, as it gets more and more fragmented between lots and lots of sites? Will people hop around more from one site to another, and become ever more promiscuous with their affection, or will it be like newspapers and magazines – they stick to their regulars and only occasionally take a peek at something else? And will it eventually get to the point where newspapers comment columns are redundant because whatever they want to say, it’s already been said before and said better somewhere in the blogosphere?

Which ties in neatly with a piece I found here– it seems that the Falmouth University College is posing the same question to Media students. I trust they will blog on the results of their project, I would be genuinely interested to learn of the views of those just entering the professional writing world with an inbuilt understanding of social media – do they feel threatened and offended by sharing a space with the grammatically unwashed?

Even the best bloggers only report from within their own circle of interests, my view is that newspapers will survive as a genre of ‘public broadcasting’, and so will continue to require the rigorous training and writing ability expected at present; bloggers will continue to strike up conversations of interest to them and those around them in a cacophony of regional accents and patois. 

‘Cos I’m a bloggerjack and I’m OK……. is a post from: Anna Raccoon