The once-hot blog site may be headed for the scrap heap now that Twitter has bought it, Jeff Sonderman writes on Poynter.org: "It’s not clear exactly what Twitter wants to do with its new purchase, but it is clear they were interested in its talent, not the product." The moral for its erstwhile users? "The lesson is to experiment, to invest resources wisely, but don’t become overly dependent on a platform you don’t own — you never know who will own it tomorrow."
Science writing news
Dahlia Lithwick writes for Slate about Virginia's slow pace in exonerating convicts cleared by new analysis of DNA evidence, then talks about the writing process for Nieman Storyboard. On breaking free of Slate's usual 1,500-word limit and one-day turnaround: "So this was a big departure for me," she said. "This was a real lesson for me in how you can take two weeks to write a piece and have it come out really significantly better reported."
Denise Graveline surveys alternatives to the fabled Flip, which met its end after Cisco Systems acquired its original maker. "The good news: The rest of the field didn't grind to a halt. The bad news: You have more choices than ever to make when choosing an ultralight camcorder." The options range from a $100 Sony with bare-bones capability, to more expensive models with built-in wifi sharing, geotagging, beefed-up memory and storage, and live-streaming for videos.
Non-profit news organizations may be the coming thing in journalism but they're having trouble convincing the Internal Revenue Service that they deserve tax-exempt status, Justin Ellis writes on the Nieman Journalism Lab site. One reason: Their applications often describe them as journalism organizations. "That’s a problem, because the IRS doesn’t recognize journalism as one of the defined categories eligible for non-profit status. But what is eligible? Education."
Mostly the latter, 146 Washington reporters say in a survey from the Society of Professional Journalists. Lead author Carolyn S. Carlson: “Reporters in Washington are struggling to give the public an objective view of the federal government, but are running into interference rather than assistance from the very people hired by the government to help them.” Full report. Comment from AHCJ, Poynter.
Here's everything we suspected all along, collected by someone not dull enough for the laboratory. "Using the first person in your writing humanizes your work," Adam Ruben writes in, of all places, Science magazine's ScienceCareers site. "If possible, therefore, you should avoid using the first person in your writing. Science succeeds in spite of human beings, not because of us, so you want to make it look like your results magically discovered themselves."
Newspapers have cut 28% of their jobs in the past five years, Robert Niles writes in an OJR post. Yet journalism schools still accept students, training workers for a dying trade. "Given that job market, why would any students want to major in print journalism? More importantly — why would any ethical college or university allow those students to do so?" Niles asks. A response from Mona Zhang on 10,000 Words. Related.
It depends on the genre you're working in, Slate says in this commentary on the Apple/Mike Daisey blowup: "If you’re a journalist, making stuff up is not a good career move. If you’re a fantasy writer, on the other hand, you’d better make stuff up by the chapter-load, or you’ll be out of a gig. But what if you fall somewhere in the middle?" Plus, what will This American Life retract next?, and other comments.
Andrew Hindes at PRNews asks three editors what makes a good headline and puts their tips in this blog post. “Avoid fluff or padding,” says Lisa Horowitz, copy chief at the L.A. Weekly. “Don't put the entire story in the headline — one of the main goals of a headline is to entice the reader, without spelling out everything the story has to offer.” The journalist should know just enough from reading the headline to determine if the story might be of interest.