Twitter description in profile story of U.N. ambassador

With even the Kenyan military and the hostage takers using Twitter in this current siege, I’m contemplating the many ways Twitter shapes not just the news, but so many communications. Then along comes this paragraph in The New York Times, from a profile story about Samantha Power, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations:

Friends say she is unaccustomed to being called Madam Ambassador, or to having people rise when she enters a room. Her @AmbassadorPower Twitter account provides a hint of how she sees herself. “United States ambassador to the United Nations,” it reads. “Mother, human rights defender, teacher, writer and member of the @RedSox nation.”

A New U.S. Player, Put on World Stage by Syria – NYTimes.com.

Top USA TODAY Science Journalist Dan Vergano Joins NationalGeographic.com as Senior Science Editor and Writer, Continues Year of Major Digital Hires – National Geographic Society Press Room

Top USA TODAY Science Journalist Dan Vergano Joins NationalGeographic.com as Senior Science Editor and Writer, Continues Year of Major Digital Hires – National Geographic Society Press Room.

National Geographic has merged print and digital operations into one and has a daily presence. This isn’t a magazine as we used to know the monthly, and I am pleased to see the connections of science and politics that Vergano brings.

Simple look at ethics loophole

Study highlights check-splitting in Va. gift reporting – The Washington Post.

This Washington Post story examines a legal practice that splits the cost of a gift from a lobbyist to an elected official. The cost of an expensive dinner divided by nine clients that the lobbyist represents becomes a cost below the $50 reporting threshold in Virginia. Some say “splitting the check in that way undermines the spirit of disclosure rules.”

The story uses real examples and on-the-record sources to examine the procedure. The story is a nice model of public-affairs reporting.

 

People will pay for content — consider cable TV

College Football’s Most Dominant Player? It’s ESPN — NYTimes.com.

The New York Times looks today at the influence ESPN has in college football — scheduling and the inspiration of conference realignments.

But this story illustrates a wider point. People will pay for content. But do people think of that cable subscription as part of their entertainment budgets or their budgets for news and information? (As if we Americans follow budgets!)

Can journalists figure out how to encourage people to pay for news in the way they pay for cable tv premium channels? There’s a lot of money out there:

Today, nearly 100 million households pay about $5.54 a month for ESPN, regardless of whether the subscribers watch it or not, whether they realize it or not. This year, ESPN will take in more than $6 billion in subscriber fees. Today, nearly 100 million households pay about $5.54 a month for ESPN, regardless of whether the subscribers watch it or not, whether they realize it or not. This year, ESPN will take in more than $6 billion in subscriber fees.

That’s a lot of money. The story points out what goes on within college football to get some of that money. But I still think the wider questions remain: What will people pay for, and why?

 

N.F.L. Pressure Said to Lead ESPN to Quit Film Project – NYTimes.com

N.F.L. Pressure Said to Lead ESPN to Quit Film Project — NYTimes.com.

The Post sale gave a chance to understand a bit more about the business of journalism. Today’s New York Times story is another. Journalism values independence from sources. Disney owns ESPN. The NFL contract pays the bills by attracting advertisers and audience. But this brain-injury reporting stretches allegiances.

Washinton Post sale and Freedom of the Press

The Washington Post will be sold to Amazon founder Jeff Bezos. (Link goes to photo gallery but starts with an advertisement.) Newspapers always have been owned by wealthy people. The old First Amendment joke was “The press is free to those who own one!” Free to very few people. Now that even I can “own” this blog press, the number of voices is great. That, coupled with some big media with funds to investigate and pursue stories that challenge special interests, could make for a robust public square. But the people have to complete the loop. A free press must have a responsive public.