Partiene må svare om personvern

Nettavisen sendte for tre uker siden et knippe seriøse, aktuelle og høyst relevante spørsmål om personvern, datalagringsdirektivet, fildeling, nettnøytralitet mm. til de politiske partiene. Bare Venstre og SV har svart. I et valgår! Dette er pinlig, på grensen til det skandaløse. Partiene må ta seg sammen og svare, slik at velgerne vet hvor de står i disse spørsmålene.

Husk på denne saken neste gang du hører en politiker beklage seg over tabloide og useriøse medier.

OPPDATERING 29. juli: Flere av partiene har åpenbart forstått hvor pinlig dette var, og har sendt sine svar. Men Arbeiderpartiet mangler fortsatt, kanskje det mest interessante av partiene i denne sammenheng.

OPPDATERING 30. juli: SVs Audun Lysbakken vil også ha svar fra Arbeiderpartiet (men kunne ikke regjerings-SV laget mer bråk om denne saken før?). Marit Nybakks svar er utsøkt arrogant: “Arbeiderpartiets organer vil drøfte denne saken når den blir aktuell.” (min kursiv).

Niches and worried journalists

Strange: Everywhere I look there are stories, interviews and analyses about the future of journalism, crisis in the media etc, but I’m not getting fed up with it! A selection of the latest:

Michael Massing is upbeat about the news-producing potential of blogs in New York Review of Books.

Chris Anderson does some good fencing with Spiegel Online.

Umair Haque presents a “nichepaper manifesto”:

Nichepapers are the future of news because their economics are superior. All the Nichepapers above are “real” enterprises, with staff, offices, and fixed and variable costs. Nichepapers offer more bang for the buck: greater benefits for far less cost. Readers get more, better, and faster content – while publishers realize lower capital intensity, lower distribution, marketing, and production costs, and less risk. What is different about them is that they are finding new paths to growth, and rediscovering the lost art of profitability by awesomeness.

Afterthought: Are their economics really superior? How good are their numbers? What about examples from other countries?

Bedre helseinformasjon på Wikipedia

I USA skal National Institutes of Health og Wikipedia-miljøet samarbeide om å forbedre helseinformasjonen i nettleksikonet:

To satisfy the public’s growing need for reliable health information, NIH and the Wikimedia Foundation want to increase the availability of accurate medical and health information available to the public. At the same time, they hope to establish strategies to interlace the distinct cultures of Wikipedia and the research community.

I Norge har Helsebiblioteket oppfordret fagfolk til å forbedre helserelatert informasjon på de norske Wikipedia-utgavene.

Temaet forskeres rolle på Wikipedia ble tatt opp i stor bredde av Vox Publica i fjor.

(Kilde for NIH-saken: Tinget på Wikipedia.)

Bredbåndsavgift, FRA-loven

Jeg har to artikler i siste Bok og Bibliotek:

Er bredbåndsavgift løsningen? forsøker å gå i dybden på dette spørsmålet (som for øvrig driver og vaker litt i vannskorpen i valgkampen for tiden).

Interessant nok merker jeg meg nå at Piratpartiet (her den tyske utgaven) er imot bredbåndsavgift. De er sterkt skeptisk til den formen for statlig sanksjonert tvangsavgift som en slik ordning innebærer, og mener at kunstnere og kulturarbeidere bør kunne finne markedsøkonomiske måter å skaffe seg inntekter på. Som Robin Meyer-Lucht oppsummerer: Piratpartiet er radikale liberalister og establishment-kritikere samtidig — digitale liberalere og motstandere av konsernkapitalismen.

Den andre artikkelen heter “Møt din nye storebror” og handler om den svenske FRA-loven. Ytterligere fordypning her kan finnes i et lengre intervju med Mikael Nilsson i StoppaFRAlagen.nu. Og oppfølging i en sak for Mandag Morgen Etterretninger: Vil skjerme norsk e-post mot svensk overvåkning.

OPPDATERING: Debatten fortsetter i Sverige. Nå er det lagt fram en utredning om politiets behov for signalspaning. Den berører FRA-debatten på flere punkter. Se den velinformerte Mark Klambergs oppsummering. (Kilde her: HAX.)

Fotnoter i Media Thule

Den sjuande klimakrisa? Kjartan Fløgstad varter opp med et fotnotenes karneval i Aftenposten i dag (OBS til meg selv: Må få lest “Grense Jakobselv”):

Ingen søker sanninga meir heilhjarta enn torturisten. Den torturerte må derimot forsvara løgnas sanning med livet som innsats. Romankunsten er løgnaktig på same vis. Som parodierande litterært stilgrep har mange med meg skrive romanar med fotnoter, tilvisingar, register og heile ruklet.

Spesielt morsomt er at en av hans kilder er Hachmeister/Siering: “Die Herren Journalisten” fra 2002 — tidligere omtalt av undertegnede! Den anbefales fortsatt.

Another good idea: The Investigations Fund

Better than whining about Google: Experiment with new models for funding journalism. In the UK, an impressive line-up of people now launch The Investigations Fund. Roy Greenslade reports:

Its aim is to foster independent public interest journalistic inquiry while encouraging a new generation of reporters.

Related posts:

Pro Publica launched

What Google (and others) can do

Find those CC images

flickrcc.jpg

A few years ago Creative Commons licensing of photos (and other works) was mostly for geeks, but I believe use of the licenses are gaining in popularity, and slowly but surely, users will also credit photographers in the correct way. At least now that, finally, Google has launched Creative Commons filtering in their image search.

Still, so far I much prefer Peter Shanks’ flickrCC search site, which manages to combine usability with beauty — no small accomplishment. I can live with the limitation that here you “only” search through Flickr images.

And don’t forget: There’s also the Creative Commons own search page.

See more useful tools for bloggers and journalists and more about photography.

Teenybopper media analyst

A 15 year old intern at Morgan Stanley in London wrote a report about how young people use the media — and the company thought it so excellent that it was published. (pdf). Matthew Robson’s report “generated five or six times more feedback than the team’s usual reports”, Morgan Stanley says. So is it any good? I don’t think people following media trends will find stunning new insights, though there might be important details there. The response should alert analysts to the merits of qualitative methodology. Above all, the report is written in clear language without all the meaningless buzzwords that usually are thrown around in such publications. If only consultants could learn that lesson, Matthew really deserves a prize!

Reuters handbook online

Reuters has made its journalism handbook available online, free for everyone. Surely a very valuable resource for journalists, students, bloggers, writers all over the world. Dean Wright explains the reasoning behind the move in the following quote:

  • “Transparency: At a time when trust is an endangered commodity in the financial and media worlds, it’s important that news consumers see the guidelines our journalists follow.
  • Service: As we’ve seen over the past decade, the barriers to publishing have dropped so that anyone with an idea and a computer can be a publisher. But it’s also become clear that publishers have a varying standard of truth, fairness and style. Our handbook is a good place for budding journalists to begin.
  • Geography: Reuters serves a global audience and the handbook recognises the cultural and political differences that our journalists face in reporting for the world. This is a handbook not just for English-language journalists in the United Kingdom or the United States, but for wherever English is used.”

I found the news at the excellent journalism.co.uk. site, which also tips about one of the good Delicious features: The lists of popular bookmarks, here for the tag “journalism”, where the Reuters handbook currently is no. 1. A good tool.