Jay Rosen, faculty member at the NYU Journalism school and journalism entrepreneur, came to speak to the CUNY Graduate School of Journalism about his new project, newassignment.net. With the goal of sparking innovation in online journalism, Rosen aims to harness the power and knowledge of people on the internet. The result is a brand new form of social networked and citizen reporting.

What is interesting about newassignment.net is that it combines the access and experience of professional reporters and editors with the passion and knowledge of an interested and engaged public. The professionals will work with “posses” of individuals in communities who will both suggest and report stories. Rosen said that newassignment.net will attempt to organize its interested public through a Director of Participation. Whoever takes on that position will have the heady task of ensuring that participants work in a useful and productive way, sorting out all of the crazies and the like.

I believe that newassignment.net appears to be an honorable endeavor. It attempts to bring professional journalism back into the community, tapping into the technology that is changing the industry. It also strives to bring the community in. But I really feel like I need to hold off judgement until I see this in action. After working in fundraising over the past few years, I have seen donors turn into volunteers, do I do believe that there are certain folk truly passionate about journalism and the media who will take that extra step to become participants in the process. If journalism is supposed to be independent, how will newassignment.net prevent certain biased or interested parties in skewing coverage or encouraging mob rule? And what kind of stories will it report on? Rosen kind of danced around that issue, so I’ll be interested to see if this is community-based, like our neighborhood beats or if this form could ever have a national stage.

As for a second blog, I agree with a few of my classmates who have indicated that an additional blog shouldn’t have to be about our neighborhood beats. I understand the argument of having neighborhood blogs, including adding value to some of our Craft stories and creating a dialogue between us and the community we’re covering, but I think this is an opportunity to revel in the form’s flexibility. We are in the midst of acquiring a great number of skills–both editorial and technological–why not use them to cover and write about something that we are passionate about, an issue or topic that we don’t necessarily get to examine while bogged down in Craft and Legal and Ethical Issues assignments?

As somewhat of an entertainment junkie, I would probably like to write about television, the upcoming awards season, and expand upon my previous post on dance and dance criticism.

A neglected McCarren Park Pool, the new track at McCarren Park with the new development that borders it, and a recently renovated Sternberg Park–over the past two weeks, my Williamsburg beat has transformed into coverage of that neighborhood’s parks. A community in transition, the development is not just concentrated on building lavish condominiums, but also on maintaining and upgrading the neighorhood’s green spaces. In the face of continued construction creating a brand-new Williamsburg, clean places to gather and play have become even more important to residents. And city officials have been listening, so far. Last Tuesday, New York City Parks Commissioner Adrian Benape even promised the audience at the Sternberg Park opening that a renovated McCarren Park Pool was next on his list.

“The bill is complex partly because negotiations were rushed, following a timetable set by President Bush. The White House wants Congress to pass the legislation before adjourning at the end of next week, expecting Democrats to withhold challenges to its most controversial provisions in the pre-election period for fear of being portrayed as soft on terrorism.”

The next few weeks will be interesting to follow and will be telling as the Democratic leadership navigate their way toward mid-term elections.

And what of those Republican “dissidents?” The proposed legislation still extends executive power in the interpretation of certain instances of torture. Again, from The Washington Post:

“It (the bill) further states that President Bush has the authority to interpret the meaning of a Geneva Conventions provision barring detainee abuses that fall below the threshold of “grave breaches.”

Although the law states that Bush “shall issue” his interpretations in published executive orders, White House spokesman Tony Snow said yesterday that administration lawyers told him that such publication — which McCain and others have highlighted as a major White House concession — might not be necessary. “

Although midterm elections are at the forefront of most politico minds, McCain cannot ignore his prospects for 2008. Perhaps he believes that reaching such a compromise with the White House will ensure him those necessary conservative votes in two years.

Weeding through the coverage of all of the political posturing and legislative negotiations regarding Guantanamo presents a daunting task. As the issues of torture, habeas corpus, and unlawful imprisonment take a back seat to legislative-speak and political compromises, I think its important to remind the public the of the greater significance of this story and answer the question, what does this mean for us? In his chilling Op-Ed piece in today’s Washington Post, writer Ariel Dorfman tries to remind us.

“Can’t the United States see that when we allow someone to be tortured by our agents, it is not only the victim and the perpetrator who are corrupted, not only the “intelligence” that is contaminated, but also everyone who looked away and said they did not know, everyone who consented tacitly to that outrage so they could sleep a little safer at night, all the citizens who did not march in the streets by the millions to demand the resignation of whoever suggested, even whispered, that torture is inevitable in our day and age, that we must embrace its darkness?”

Obviously, contributing Op-Ed columnists enjoy a more flexible arena in which to write and analyze the news. But, in a story that inevitably encourages passionate views on human rights issues, the ethical problem of journalist as advocate will undoubtably be raised. Stayed tuned for more on that subject next week…

With an art form such as dance, which cannot claim the populist appeal of music, movies, or television, there isn’t a multitude of voices in the criticism world, especially in the small New York dance community (where artists and choreographers eagerly await the response of three or four heralded critics). But dance critics, like all other critics and reporters in the field, face a changing industry and what are they doing to adapt to it? The answer is, not much. For example, dance reviews on both the New York Times and the Village Voice Web sites are staid pages with just text and image, without any arena where readers can give feedback or post comments. The possibilities are endless….

The nature of dance, as I have learned, is both collaborative and flexible. Dancers and choreographers work together to create movement, different bodies must adapt to each other and to varying conditions of studio space, injuries, staging, costumes, and lighting. Why can’t writing about dance adhere to the same virtues? As an editor of a major news outlets, I would give critics their space, but the conversation would be opened to include a myriad of opinions and voices so the reader would be more informed. For dance, an art that at its essence is intangible and lives in the present, video would always accompany the reviews. (In this future world, problems with copyrights, etc wouldn’t exist….). Let me take a moment and outline how the tools of online media could greatly benefit dance criticism.

- As I said above, video should be an integral piece of dance reviews and articles, including those of past performances and/or the performance being reviewed. Videos of rehearsals could also give readers an invaluable behind-the-scenes perspective.

- Most reviews are accompanied by images, but a comprehensive slideshow would help enhance the descriptions in the articles.

- Have interviews with choreographers, presenters, and dancers available via podcasts.

- Have a link to the artist’s or choreographer’s statement about their work. Having attended many dance performances with those unfamiliar with the art form, I’ve realized that audience members often look for the intended meaning in a dance. Posting this statement from the artist would give them a voice and provide a potential or former audience member with background into the choreographic process.

- Have a taste aggregator like Amazon.com…if you like this choreographer’s work, you may like this one…links to reviews and other articles about the suggested choreographer would be available to readers.

- Post links to the choreographer and presenter’s Web sites so the reader can then gain more information about the performance.

- Have a link to technorati.com to see what blogs are saying about the performance and the choreographer.

- Have a link at the bottom of the article that allows readers to send emails and comments to the critic.

- Host message boards and fan forums in which the public can comment on the performance and artists. Live discussions with critics and artists could also help increase reader feedback, helping to transform the strictly defined relationship between these three groups.

- During the season (new work is most often premiered during the September-June months), have links to blogs in which critics and outside bloggers examine the new work and trends.

- Post links to a calendar of local performances and events.

In the effort of full disclosure, I studied dance at Connecticut College, have worked in the arts as a grantwriter for the past two years, and am passionate about dance. Having said that, I believe that figuring out how to write and publish collaboratively about dance in way that incorporates multimedia, would reinvigorate dance criticism and would invite the audience and readers into the art form.

Before delving into an ongoing analysis of coverage of the Guantanamo Bay story, my initial reaction is that the issues would benefit from combining the tools used by each of the mediums–in-depth analysis of print and online, visual breakdown by bullet points and soundbites of broadcast, and the ability to link online to both original documents (i.e. letter from General Colin Powell to Senator John McCain) and to varying perspectives.

May have more to say after this morning’s presidential press conference…

At its best, journalism helps maintain communities, both large and small. Through the dissemination of information of import and interest to the public, journalism helps people preserve connections and helps inform decisions they may make during their day, whether it be what train to take on the morning commute or what candidate should receive their vote come election day. Through the news, people are able to remain well informed about their local community while far-away stories are illuminated. So, as journalists, we should be committed to meticulous reporting, insightful analysis, vociferous questioning, and transparency in order to provide the public with information that enables them to better interpret and understand events and issues. In all its changing forms, journalism provides a dialogue about the modern human experience, and with ever-increasing opportunities for people to respond to the media and publish work themselves, it has become a much more active conversation.

The internet has revolutionized the way we all conduct our lives, images and information come at us quickly in a multitude of forms, providing an exceeding array of choices for people in how we listen to music, how we shop, how we consume the news, among other things. The internet has altered the way people receive, interpret, and now, publish information, including news, opinions, and personal reactions. Choice reigns supreme and journalists and the media are now faced with the challenge of how to adapt the ways in which news is delivered and utilize the transformative power of the internet to the public’s benefit. Journalism should be a reflection of the times in which we live. I believe that the intersection of this burgeoning technology that allows for a myriad of voices to be heard and stories to be told in new ways with a society forced to face new fears, has provided the impetus for the changes that are occurring in journalism. People needed an arena in which to react, voice opinions, make connections, and pose questions. In this new arena, if the public wants transparency from their government, whether it is in national or local affairs, they no longer have to leave that job to the traditional gatekeepers, they can begin the conversation themselves. Citizens (and that includes trained journalists) can debate, question, and share ideas and people have more choices than ever in information content and format. And, as trained practitioners, we should listen and filter. Invite these new storytellers into the discussion, whether they are posting well-reported investigative pieces or personal musings, or, as it may be, invite ourselves into their discussion. Perhaps they will help lead us to discover different stories to tell and more innovative ways to tell them.

Questions that currently confound me through all of this are: how will standards change and translate to online media? How will a trained journalist’s role change as the industry transforms? How can we think of new ways to filter and navigate the ever-increasing amount of information available to the public? How will the “agenda” be set? (See Time’s new idea as newsweeklies rapidly decrease in influence). Are Time’s efforts completely futile in a world where many people pick and choose the way to receive their news from a menu of niche publications, blogs, and user determined email blasts? What else can publications do to stay relevant? As more and more of our lives are navigated through a high-tech world, how do citizens without access to the technology remain a part of the dialogue?