Recent comments
 | Support J-Source | ||
 | Best online-only article or series | ||
J-Source and ProjetJ are projects of The Canadian Journalism Foundation in collaboration with leading schools and organizations Editor-in-chief, J-Source: | |||
| Support J-Source | ||
| Best online-only article or series | ||
J-Source and ProjetJ are projects of The Canadian Journalism Foundation in collaboration with leading schools and organizations Editor-in-chief, J-Source: | |||
Thanks for flagging the error and it's been corrected.
Good article. One correction though: it's the Clinton News Record (not Record News).
Quote:
“My principle responsibility ....."
One would wish that an editor, however senior he may be, would know the difference between "principle" and "principal".
I'm glad you're covering this issue, but I disagree strongly with your take. My hunch is that you've never written any computer code. Underneath every algorithm is a human mind or multiple human minds. Those that write code know that their interests and ideas are indelibly embedded. Technology shapes those ideas, no question. And technology shapes the consumption of those ideas as well. But I think you set up a false opposition between human values and technologies.
It's human values and human ideas that drive algorithms. Same in statistics. Same in science. Same in Python, Ruby, PHP or Javascript.
Put another way, it's not the technology that worries me. The automated data gathering and analysis, and publication, is awesome. What worries me is the values that are making these algorithms. And it also worries me that these processes will probably be proprietary and closed. News outlets are too often commercial enterprises first, and "journalistic" enterprises second. In scientific endevours the methods and the statistical analysis have to be published and peer reviewed. I doubt news outlets will open up their data sets, or their methods.
In my view, this technological development is only a new face to a long time challenge for journalism: what passes as journalism, often isn't.
Margaret Wente might have done some mistakes at one time or the other, but mistakes are tolerable, not the attempt of plagiarism. Plagiarizing is just like cheating or stealing the work done by the other hard working writers. Regards, Turnitin free
Une version préliminaire de cette note de lecture confondait malheureusement la Suède avec la Suisse... Nous avons corrigé cela. Nos excuses encore une fois. CG/MFB
Bonjour! De petites erreurs se sont glissées dans cet article dans lequel je suis citée. Il est faux que «Anne-Marie Parent compte également refuser de signer le nouveau contrat de Transcontinental», puisque je ne collabore même pas aux médias de cet éditeur! À votre question: «Si vous collaboriez, signeriez-vous?» J'avais certes répondu que si j'étais une pigiste de Transcontinental, je ne signerais pas.
Je n'ai pas pu dire non plus ceci, puisque la question ne s'est pas présentée, n'étant pas une collatrice de Transcontinental: «Le problème, c’est que si je ne signe pas avec Transcontinental, je vais aller voir qui? Québecor? Ils font signer le même type de contrat.»
Par ailleurs, on me fait dire deux phrases contradictoires: «Bien qu’elle embrasse la cause, Anne-Marie Parent estime quant à elle qu’il est trop tard pour s’opposer à ce type de contrats.» C'est en contradiction avec ma première citation, où j'ai espoir que cette fois-ci la mobilisation fasse la différence (alors il n'est pas trop tard pour s'opposer à ce type de contrats!): «Même son de cloche pour la journaliste Anne-Marie Parent, qui croit que la mobilisation au Canada anglais pourrait faire la différence cette fois-ci. «Il y a des journalistes partout au Canada qui collabore avec Transcontinental, avance-t-elle. Ils pourraient agir comme levier pour la contestation.»
Enfin, je ne comprends pas pourquoi vous me faites dire ceci: «Elle ajoute qu’il est difficile pour les journalistes indépendants de développer une solidarité puisqu’ils n’ont aucune façon de se regrouper.» On a une façon de se regrouper, c'est en devenant membre de l'Association des journalistes indépendants du Québec (AJIQ)!
Ce qui est difficile, c'est plutôt que n'importe qui peut devenir journaliste, puisque le métier n'est pas réservé ni sanctionné par un ordre professionnel, alors tout le monde peut proposer des textes aux médias. Pour se monter un portfolio, les débutants acceptent de collaborer à des tarifs dérisoires, voire bénévolement, ce qui fait que les éditeurs trouveront toujours des pigistes acceptant des conditions peu reluisantes.
Mai oui, il faut se regrouper en devenant membre de l'AJIQ: plus nous sommes nombreux, plus nous avons du poids, face aux éditeurs-Goliath! Il faut que le plus grand nombre de pigistes possible se rencontre à l'Assemblée générale annuelle 2013 de l'AJIQ, qui se tiendra le 19 mars prochain au local A-2730 du pavillon Hubert-Aquin de l'UQÀM, à compter de 18 h 30. www.ajiq.qc.ca
Solidairement vôtre,
Anne Marie Parent (sans trait d'union!)
En effet, nos excuses... CG/MFB
J'ai pris note de la réaction de M. Trudel. Toutefois, la note de lecture reflète intégralement l'état de choses au moment de sa rédaction. Ce matin encore, Media Research (http://www.mediaresearch.ca/about/) se présente comme «The Canadian Media Research Consortium promotes economic, social and cultural research in Canadian media and communications ». Il cite les universités et le CEM comme partenaires. De même, au moment de la rédaction de la note, le site Internet (http://www.cmrcccrm.ca) nous renvoyait à celui de Media Research (ce lien semble inactif ce matin). Tant mieux si le Consortium a été alerté de la situation, mais la conclusion de M. Trudel est bien mal avisée en l'occurrence. Vérification a été faite sur le site du Consortium alors actif... Les faits parlent d'eux-mêmes et il est très étonnant qu'une telle situation n'ait pas été détectée avant la rédaction de notre note, par ceux qui sont responsables du Consortium ou y sont associés. Bien entendu, cet élément nouveau modifie notre analyse du texte de Edge eu égard au «nouveau» mandat du Consortium. Reste la critique de Edge.
Marc-François Bernier (Ph. D.)Titulaire, Chaire de recherche sur la francophonie canadienne en communication, spécialisée en éthique du journalisme (CREJ)(www.crej.ca)Professeur titulaireDépartement de communicationUniversité d'OttawaPavillon Desmarais55, av. Laurier Est, pièce 11146 K1N 6N5(613) 562-5800 (3828)mbernier@uottawa.ca(http://www.communication.uottawa.ca/fra/profs/bernier.html)
Bonjour
il y a une erreur assez grave de traduction : cet article concerne la Suède ( Sweden en anglais) et pas la Suisse (Switzerland)....
Coridalement
Pierre Ganz
Bonjour
L'article est très intéressant mais je me demande si vous ne confondez pas la Suisse et la Suède. Les informations correspondant aux partis politiques ne jouent pas pour la Suisse. Par ailleurs, le titre de l'étude de Von Krogh parle bien de "Sweden", jusqu'à nouvel ordre la Suède. Merci de corriger, c'est une erreur commise souvent outre-Atlantique.
Cordialement,
Christian Campiche
"...Pagemasters currently employs about 20 journalists—eight of which..."
Maybe "eight of whom"?
Revenue "challenges"? Seriously?
For crying out loud, call a spade a spade!
I'm looking forward for this every year I'm really thankful for the opportunity that they have given us freelancers to share our talents.
buy real instagram followers
get more instagram follower
Regardless of what the police can do with your phone, leaving it unlocked these days is pure foolishness! Smartphones are logged into email, social media, and banking information. Forget the cops, think about what a theif can do with it!
This has been a topic we have been focusing heavily on in my studies in the DJD program at USF St. Pete in Florida. My fellow students come from all different backgrounds and some have a decidely different opinion about twitter, and the 24/7 news cycle, than others. Some of the ideas that we have discussed amongst ourselves have been centered around the source of the piece of information you are reporting on, their motives, and their past releasing of information. It seems we have decided that a lot of the problems with the false information being released is based around the notion of being first to report on a topic, and meeting deadlines that are unrealistic based on the time it takes to verify said information. I am of the opinion that a lot of false information comes from people who are reporting on topics that are "out of their reach" so to speak. If you can't get anyone to a scene, and you don't have valuable contributers that have a history of reporting on topics like the one you are about to attempt to report on, than maybe that topic would be best to left alone untill you can gather and verify more information, and yes this means you may not be first to release ground breaking information, but you can gather resources during this process, so that you might have a shot at being first on the next one, but you would be doing it with confidence that you are reporting on factual information that will better inform your readers, and raise your credibility.
With apologies to UCI President Pat McQuaid who recently villified another lying, cheating miscreant - "Jonah Lehrer has no place in journalism, and he deserves to be forgotten in journalism."
Lehrer should 1. donate the $20,000 to a journalism charity, or set up a scholarship somewhere for journalism ethics, but he probably won't; and he should find another profession, although he gives every indication of wanting to continue in journalism.
Welcome, Thomas! And thanks, Dean, for your years of work as the founding law editor. - Ivor.
Le ton du Journal de Montréal est-il conservateur ou à droite ? Je ne sais pas. Pour le savoir il faudrait réaliser une étude rigoureuse sur les contenus du Journal. Ce qui n’a pas été fait. Je ne peux donc pas affirmer ce qu’apparemment j’affirme dans cet article. De la même façon et pour la même raison, je ne dis pas que les intérêts des journalistes ou les intérêts du propriétaire du Journal de Montréal se reflètent dans le contenu du Journal.
Chantal Francoeur, professeure de journalisme à l'école des médias de l'UQAM et membre du comité éditorial de ProjetJ.
I don't see a conflict of interest here. Spurr writes a freelance restaurant review column for the Chronicle Herald, and is entitled to be paid for his work. If a favourably reviewed restaurant wants to run the review on its website to promote its menu, he's also entitled to be paid. How is this any different from, say, a freelance book reviewer writing a review for the Chronicle Herald, and then turning around and selling the same review to another publication? This is how freelancers make their money? The fact that Spurr also happens to be an employee the Chronicle Herald is irrelevant.
A fascinating story. As much as I support freelancers' intellectual property rights, I think Bill Spurr was totally out of line here. But I also find it a bit odd that the Chronicle Herald needs to put one of its own staffers on freelance status to write restaurant reviews. When I was at The Citizen way back when, I would have loved reviewing restaurants as part of my regular assignment, if only to get away from the hurly-burly of city hall reporting, not to mention all the free (ie employer-subsidized) eats!
This article fails to mention that The Link's editor-in-chief did show up at NASH's Plenary in 2012, while the paper was a member, with a "stack of motions" that had been approved by the newspaper's masthead and Board of Directors. The proposals were intended to bring about a number of changes to the functioning of the organization and tackle the problem of newspapers looking to exit CUP.
However, that Plenary was cancelled due to a virus at the conference.
Multiple requests by The Link to hold Plenary at a later date or online were ignored by CUP. The newspaper was left unable to articulate its grievances as guaranteed by CUP’s founding documents or to deal with a fee situation that was no longer affordable. The only remaining options were to leave an organization that had breached our fundamental rights or pay an additional year’s fee to guarantee a speaker’s right at the next NASH.
The decision to leave was of CUP’s making and hardly an “after-the-fact approach.”
Justin Giovannetti,
President of The Link's Board of Directors
Zach Seward of Quartz: "The 800-word story is dead; go short; go long; or even better, go visual (with photos and charts)."
Oh, really?
Why wouldn't someone who has time for more than 100 words but fewer than 5,000 be happy with 800, give or take a few?
Good question. As it turns out, Quartz's readers -- "business people in the new global economy" -- are fine with it.
Right this minute their #2 story is a piece on the Dell buyout that measures 699 words. Yes, it includes two charts -- just as it might have in the Stone Age.
And clicking on "popular" gets you a story about ARM Holdings, the UK microchip designer. That one is 782 words, with three graphics.
Good legacy-style facts and analysis in both of them. The form is alive and thriving.
I signed up to write a couple of pieces for a magazine and was livid when I received an e-mail back from the editor. Instead of her comments, there were comments from the PR department of the sponsor of the magazine.
Perhaps it as a bit naive of me to assume that this wouldn't happen (I did accept the assignments in rush during a hectic period) but I will certainly do my research next time and won't participate in this type of writing again. Call it whatever you like, but it certainly isn't journalism when the story is vetted by PR people and they are suggesting revisions to the story to make it more palatable to their eyes.
My solution? I told them to do whatever they wanted with my stories as long as they didn't put my byline on them. In exchange for not finishing the assignment to their satisfaction, I promised not to send them an invoice.
Merci à M. Cipriani pour ce lien et pour la découverte du vocable "mook", que je ne connaissais pas. J'ai dit la même chose que ces auteurs à un ancien éditeur du journal Le Soleil, il y a bien des années, avant même l'explosion de la pub sur le web: le modèle d'affaires des médias menace la crédibilité du journalisme. La lecture du blogue de The Newsosaur est éclairante à cet égard. Les éditeurs de journaux pensent aux annonceurs, pas aux lecteurs, et c'est ce qui les tuera. Je me suis abonné au magazine Nouveau Projet pour cette même raison: ce que je peux lire là, je ne le trouverai pas ailleurs. C'est à cela que doivent se concentrer les journalistes: donner du contenu inédit à leur clientèle, au lieu de remâcher la même bouillie que la concurrence.