Creating the future of journalism (post and podcast)

I just finished listening to the two podcasts by Dave Winer on what we need from Biden, and his conversation with Jeff Jarvis on how to work around the brokenness of the mainstream media in the 2024 election. This was an excellent conversation. I  have several comments on the Jeff Jarvis podcast, and will cover them in this post, and there is a separate podcast at the end of this post.

Jeff Jarvis brought up two points based on prior writing/conversations with Dave Winer. One was “the power of the link”, and the other was that people should uses their own personal spaces to respond to someone else’s post or story. I agree that if you are going to talk about someone, or something that they wrote, you should link to it. However, recently Dave Winer wrote a post critical about the people and work of the Podcasting 2.0 effort (how they reimplemented rssCloud), but he did not link to the thing he was complaining about (I had to track it down). How does this square with what was discussed in this podcast? I think it is inconsistent at a minimum, and perhaps bordering on hypocrisy.

Another topic was people commenting on social media posts, and how a lot of these comments were “spam”, in that people were not responding to what was posted, but were posting to try to take advantage of the “flow” of the original poster (in this case, I am assuming it was Dave Winer – it could also happen to Jeff Jarvis,  but it was Dave Winer who brought it up). This is a tricky topic. Both Dave Winer and Jeff Jarvis said they want to encourage conversation (well, maybe it was Jeff more than Dave). However, if you want to have conversation, you have to give people the chance to say something. If the response to comments is deleting comments, or blocking people because they disagree or are critical, this discourages people from commenting. If I write a post commenting on another post (either compliments or criticism), how should I inform the person or site I am are writing about? Both Dave Winer and Jeff Jarvis said people should be “respectful”. That sounds good, until the conversation gets blocked. I do not have any solutions to offer here, but if someone wants to have a conversation, it has to be two-way/bidirectional. In the case of social media apps, part of the design of the apps, in my opinion, is to encourage conversation. Blocking people and deleting comments in a thread do not give the impression that someone wants to have a conversation.

The next topic I would like to address is providing an alternative to the mainstream media. Dave Winer talked at some point about individuals creating stories (covering  events (like reporters, I suppose)) and creating/editing a flow of stories (again I assume this is mainstream media stories, which is a lot of what get commented about on blogs). I  will address the “flow of stories” idea first. During the 2020 George Floyd protests, I started a site to curate the mainstream media and social media coverage of the protests in Portland,  Oregon. The site was called Portland Protest News, and I updated it daily for a month and a half before I had to stop due to an illness. I set up news flows from mainstream media (primarily using RSS feeds), reviewed those feeds on a daily basis, selected stories to post, created a post with links to those stories, and also created a newsletter with the same content. At best, I was able to do this in an hour. Most of the time, it was 1.5 hours, and sometimes two hours. It was difficult to do this and work a regular 8 hour day. To me, the curated flow that Dave Winer talked about in the podcast with Jeff Jarvis would take at least this much time. Someone would have to put in that time to create a dynamic site with daily posts.

Next, I would like to discuss the topic of people covering events. I thought the idea of protesting the New York Times was interesting,  and the idea of others news organizations covering that protest might occur. However,  in a recent post of mine commenting on an essay by Anne Applebaum on protests in Poland, Applebaum stated that protests, if not carefully targeted, achieve little. I do not think there would be a clear enough goal to make protesting the New York Times effective. I think that the idea of independent writers/bloggers attending events and publishing accounts of this events is worthwhile, but I think there are several issues as well. Finding out about events takes work, attending events takes time, and writing about the events takes time and effort. Who will do these things? Who will coordinate this work? How will the posts/stories be distributed so that others can find out about them? The story “The Little Red Hen” comes to my mind, where one animal does all the work to produce a loaf of bread. Where are the “little red hens” to do this work?

There are some independent news organizations covering state legislatures (States Newsroom) and voting issues (Votebeat). There are small news startups trying to cover local news (Salem Reporter in Salem, Oregon as an example). There is even a online newspaper in Washington state (the Sammamish Independent) that is produced by volunteers. These are all current examples of independent coverage. Some of them have some funding, but many are dependent on subscriptions or donations. Doc Searls, in his work at the Ostrom Workshop at Indiana University, has written a series of stories about “The News Commons“, and experiments in the Bloomington Indiana area. So, I point to these examples of “little red hens”, each with a focus, but providing inspiration and food for thought to others.

I welcomed this podcast, as it shared many ideas and food for thought. I hope my analysis has done the same, and I welcome any and all feedback. No one will be blocked or deleted,  I assure you!

I recently posted a quote from Hannah Arendt: “We are free to change the world and start something new in it” . I would like to point to a recent post by Ken Smith about how to solve the problem of Donald Trump. He organized his post as a series of problems to be addressed. I think the structure of this post could be implemented as a website in a fairly straightforward manner. I will try to create something in the next week that could serve as a model. Maybe I can even get Ken Smith or someone to collaborate with me on this project. Any assistance would be welcomed!

Why I am sticking with Joe Biden

Yes, I watched the CNN debate on Thursday with Joe Biden and Donald Trump. Yes, I  thought Joe Biden’s “performance” at the debate was poor, compared to the confidence of Trump’s presentation. However, Biden answered the questions set by the moderators and generally answered those questions truthfully, while Trump repeatedly refused to answer the questions in the debate, even after being pressed several times for some of those questions. Trump told so many lies that it took CNN’s Daniel Dale several minutes just to list all the lies that Trump spewed out over the course of the debate (also see text of fact checking). As Joe Biden mentioned afterwards, “It’s hard to debate a liar.”.

Several other perspectives:

Mary Trump (Trump’s niece) on Substack:

While Biden’s performance is rightly being criticized, it was the debate moderators who allowed Donald to steamroll the truth with an incessant stream of increasingly bizarre and dangerous lies — that he, not President Biden instituted a cap on insulin, that blue states allow women and their doctors to commit infanticide, and that Nancy Pelosi  was somehow responsible for January 6th — while refusing to answer the questions asked of him. Why Jake Tapper and Dana Bash chose to abdicate their journalistic responsibility in service to a man who is an enemy of American democracy and a free press only they know, but that abdication should be a much bigger story, I know who Joe Biden really is. And I know who my uncle really is.  And I’ll take the decent guy with the sore throat who believes in democracy over the rapist insurrectionist monster every single time.

https://marytrump.substack.com/p/why-im-still-with-president-biden

Seth Abraham on Substack:

Biden will not step away from the 2024 election cycle because it would hand the presidency, beyond any doubt, to a confirmed rapist, serial sexual assailant, active insurrectionist, convicted felon, pathological liar, malignant narcissistic sociopath, gleeful adulterer, career criminal, unrepentant con man, traitorous would-be U.S. dictator, misogynist, antisemite, racist, homophobe, transphobe, Islamophobe, and budding war criminal.

https://sethabramson.substack.com/p/the-extremely-simple-reason-maga

Heather Cox Richardson on Substack:

Tonight was the first debate between President Joe Biden and presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, and by far the most striking thing about the debate was the overwhelming focus among pundits immediately afterward about Biden’s appearance and soft, hoarse voice as he rattled off statistics and events. Virtually unmentioned was the fact that Trump lied and rambled incoherently, ignored questions to say whatever he wanted; refused to acknowledge the events of January 6, 2021; and refused to commit to accepting the result of the 2024 presidential election, finally saying he would accept it only if it met his standards for fairness. 

https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/june-27-2024

The American people have a choice between a convicted felon and liar, and a man who has fought to preserve democracy and improve our way of life. I am going with the second one. 

What If Trump Wins? An interactive web site

Via an email newsletter from Eileen Flanagan, I found out about an interactive web site/story called “What If Trump Wins?”. The site presents the reader with an initial choice – does Trump or Biden win the 2024 US presidential election? Based on what result the reader selects, a set of other choices is presented along with a narrative to fit the initial choice. From the main site page, there are 25 different ways that the story ends. The site was created by the advocacy group Choose Democracy, which conducted trainings back in the 2020 election to prepare for a coup or possible electoral mischief. I “played” the story both ways (first selecting Trump and following the suggested actions, then selecting Biden and following different actions). I thought it was an excellent “thought exercise” which provided insight in how a Trump presidency might unfold. Check it out – it might make you want to get involved in the election!

Book Review: “Rules for Resistance: Advice from Around the Globe for the Age of Trump”

I found this book on the shelves near the John Kasich book I posted about yesterday. The book is a series of essays published in 2017 and edited by David Cole, National Legal Director for the ACLU. The essays are grouped by region (Europe, The Middle East, Asia, Latin America) as well as a set of essays for journalists covering Trump, and the text of the original guide from the group Indivisible.

Each essay passes on ideas/anecdotes on specific authoritarian rulers in those regions. The ones about Silvio Berlusconi in Italy were most like Trump, but essays about Orban, Modi, and Putin were also instructive. There were two essays that I thought had the best advice for opposing Trump:

Luigi Zingales, in an op-ed for the New York Times in November 2016 (paywall, also mostly available in this Washington Examiner post), compares Trump and Berlusconi, showing many similarities. He points out that Hillary Clinton spent so much time explaining how bad Trump was that she did not often promote her own ideas, to make the positive case for voting for her. Also, the news media focused too much on Trump’s behavior. The only two politicians who beat Berlusconi did it by focusing on the issues, not Berlusconi’s character. From this, I would say that the Democratic Party is trying to point out the significant policy differences between Trump and Biden, but I think there is still too much focus on Trump’s character flaws. Also, the hope that the indictments against Trump would keep him out of the election have gone for naught, so he will have to be beaten at the ballot box.

Anne Applebaum wrote an article for the Washington Post (also available on her site) called “Advice from Europe for Anti-Trump Protesters”, in which she made some observations about elections in Poland in 2015 and 2016. A radical populist party was able to win with a minority of voters, and started to destroy democratic and state institutions. Poles took to the streets in huge demonstrations. Here is a summary of her reflections on the value of those protests (her sub-headings from the article):

  • Protest makes people feel better
  • Protest, if not carefully targeted, achieves little
  • Protests inspire conspiracy theorists
  • Politics matter more than protests
  • In a democracy, real change comes through politics, political parties and elections

I think her final two sentences sum up her advice well:

“Protesting might make you feel better, it might win a few battles, and it might attract attention. I’m sorry if you are angry at “the establishment”, but you need to work for it and within it if you want it to change.”

https://www.anneapplebaum.com/2016/11/16/advice-from-europe-for-anti-trump-protesters/

Book review: “It’s Up To Us” by John Kasich

The subtitle of this book is “Ten Little Ways We Can Bring About Big Change”. I stumbled across this while researching some other posts, and recently got it from the library. It draws on John Kasich’s career in public service (governor of Ohio, US presidential candidate, US House rep). The ten ways are as follows:

  • Start A Movement – Mentions the women’s suffragist movement, environmental issues (think Greta Thunberg) among others
  • Be The Change Where You Live – Look at what you can do in your neighborhood, your town or city
  • Be Prepared To Walk A Lonely Road – Being out in front of an issue can bring criticism, but accept that you might need to stand out from the crowd before you can find a way to convince others to stand beside you
  • Slow Down – Take time to stop, look and breathe
  • Bounce Back – After a setback, we need to be able to dust ourselves off and get back in the mix
  • Love Thy Neighbor – Work to lift people up, not tear people down
  • Get Out Of Your Silo – Take in other points of view and stay open to revisiting your own points of view
  • Put Yourself In Someone Else’s Shoes – Understand other people’s struggles
  • Spend Time Examining Your Eternal Destiny – Think about the footprints you are leaving behind
  • Know That You Are Made Special – Live each day in a way that lets your individuality shine through

I thought this was an uplifting book, if short on specifics, worth a read if you are thinking about activism.

Are we creating great things?

In 2017, I wrote a post with the title “We have great tools to create – are we creating great things?”. It was in reference to a Doc Searls liveblog post on a podcasting conference at Columbia University. My observation was that there are a lot of low-quality podcasts, but as time goes on, better ones will appear.

Since then, the availability and quality of tools has increased (blogging, podcasting, video, etc.). Ken Smith recently commented on the tools aspect by linking to a video by actor Jason Alexander on acting/screenwriting – that the tools needed for creating videos are available to everyone (Alexander finishes by saying “You can create a movie on your phone…”). Ken mentions that the same is true for active citizenship as well. I will follow up on this in a minute.

In a recent post, I listed the tools I needed to create a podcast in the car, and have other posts on how to add podcast cover art to a WordPress-hosted podcast, and simple instructions for using WordPress as a podcast hosting tool. The tools available for blogging are always increasing, as is the same for video production. So, since we have the tools part covered, are there some great things out there? Are there more great things that need to be created?

Two excellent instances of group efforts in a topic are the Election Law Blog and the Americans of Conscience Checklist. The first is a group blog following current events in election law and the politics of election law. The second is a group creating lists of bite-sized actions that people can take to promote progressive causes. Both sites use WordPress as their main platform.

Jeffrey Issac’s Democracy in Dark Times blog does an excellent job of addressing issues relating to Donald Trump. Recently, he has been covering the student protests at his university, Indiana University, and calling out bad behavior by the university administration and Indiana elected officials.

I have made efforts to document events such as the protests in Portland, Oregon in 2020, the Georgia Trump election interference trial, a podcast about the “tools for thought” space, a site documenting news on the “return to office” efforts in the American workforce, and a “link zettlekasten” capturing news on elections.

Dave Winer has called for “determination” in using tools and resources to pick up the slack for lack of coverage by the New York Times and other outlets. Ken Smith has called to start “the work of a generation” (I am assuming this is work to try to ensure that our democratic system continues). I recorded a podcast addressing these calls (punchline: take some action, do something, don’t just call for resistance/protest). I think that this quote from a more recent post of mine is a good way to wrap this up:

… I recently listened to a Radio Open Source podcast episode focusing on the life of Hannah Arendt, who lived under authoritarian and totalitarian regimes in the 20th century. One line of her writing stood out to me: “We are free to change the world and start something new in it.”. I think that every podcast is a chance to change the world, and anyone is free to create one and send it out into the world.

https://andysylvester.com/2024/04/19/the-joy-of-podcasting/

As Ken Smith quoted Pete Buttigieg:

Don’t wait. Start now.

http://oldschool.scripting.com/ksmith3123@gmail.com/2024/04/20/123857.html#a124210

Checking on past electoral results in your precinct

In my previous post, I was able to locate the precinct number in my county in Oregon where I vote. My next exploration was to see the results for the 2022 and 2020 elections for races that I voted on. There is a site called OpenElections which works to collect raw data from elections across the United States. This data is stored on Github. The data is organized by state, so I was quickly able to find the folder/repo with results for Oregon. Next, I found the 2022 general election results and the 2020 general election results (both results were saved as CSV files). Here were the results for my precinct for both of those years for the major (Dem/Rep) candidates:

2022

  • State House Rep: Tracy Cramer (Rep) 523, Anthony Medina (Dem) 542
  • State Senate: Richard Walsh (Dem) 533, Kim Thatcher (Rep) 528
  • US House Rep: Andrea Salinas (Dem) 517, Mike Erickson (Rep) 511
  • US Senate: Jo Rae Perkins (Rep) 466, Ron Wyden (Dem) 564
  • Governor: Tina Kotek (Dem) 486, Betsy Johnson (Ind) 71, Christine Drazan (Rep) 508

2020

  • State House Rep: Teresa Alonso Leon (Dem) 660, Anna Kasachev (Rep) 525
  • State Senate: Not up for re-election
  • US House Rep: Amy Ryan Courser (Rep) 508, Kurt Schrader (Dem) 649
  • US Senate: Jo Rae Perkins (Rep) 503, Jeff Merkley (Dem) 669
  • US President: Donald Trump (Rep) 507, Joe Biden (Dem) 678

Overall, this precinct is pretty evenly split between Democratic and Republican voters, even though statewide Democrats hold majorities in the Oregon House and Senate, and all 5 statewide offices. In my opinion, based on the results of the 2022 governor’s race (Tina Kotek beat Christine Drazan by 67,000 votes out of 1,935,852 votes cast), Oregon is becoming more of a “purple” state than remaining a “blue” state.