#ISOJ Keynote: Can Social Media Help Us Create A More Informed Public?

April 19th, 2013

Here’s the transcript of a talk I gave at the International Symposium for Online Journalists in Austin, TX. I’ll add the video if they post it later.

—-

Now as many of you know, I’m usually I’m not at a loss for words. But I really struggled to decide what to talk about today, especially in the wake of the attack this week on my hometown of Boston. Some of my fondest memories of the city are of that magical Monday, once a year each April, when everyone would line the streets and cheer on one stranger after another – encouraging them to succeed in accomplishing a little magic of their own.

I had originally planned to the role of social media in our coverage of Newtown today. But the course the events in Boston have led me – and perhaps many of us here, I suppose – to broaden what we truly need to talk about here at ISOJ.

So I’d like to discuss something that both Newton and Boston have in common, beyond the obvious horror and needless loss:

We messed up. We didn’t always get the story right. We didn’t serve the public as well as we could have.

Now, a dynamic similar to the fog of war certainly rears its head during catastrophic breaking news, and mistakes get made. It is perhaps rare indeed for a major breaking news story to be told from start to finish without some confusion getting in the way of informing the public.

As the person at NPR who sent out the tweet mistakenly reporting the death of Gabrielle Giffords, I know we are all capable of making these mistakes, and understand the reporting failures that cause them to happen. Whether we’re on-air reporters, Web producers or just members of the public with large Twitter followings, we all have the potential of getting it wrong and making matters worse.

So that’s why I’d like to talk today about some of the factors that lead to these mistakes, how they’re amplified by social media, and perhaps, how we can mitigate them better by rethinking how we engage the public.

—–

Whether it’s Boston, or Newtown, or some other breaking story, we all kick into high gear. At every newsroom, it’s all hands on deck – battle stations. These are the moments where the public expects us to do our jobs, and do them well. These are the moments we pride ourselves in our roles as professionals. And thankfully, many of us rise to the occasion.

But in recent decades, we’ve put ourselves in a bind by creating news cycles that are faster and faster and faster. And speed is often the scurge of accuracy.

First there’s 24-hour broadcast news, where in some quarters there is a sin much greater than getting the story wrong, as you can always make a correction later. And that sin is allowing for dead air.

Dead air is unacceptable, of course, yet we can’t exactly take over everyone’s TVs or radios, hit a pause button and force them go get a cup of coffee while we sort out the facts. Apart from throwing in extra commercials, we have to fill that air time one way or another. And that creates a scenario where even the best journalists are more likely to make mistakes. In a bid to keep the coverage going, they may find themselves talking about a second gunman, or reporting on the shooter’s Facebook page that actually turns out to be his innocent brother’s. They may report breaking news of arrests in Boston, then dig deeper holes for themselves trying to explain how they were led astray by their sources. And all awhile, the broadcast rolls on. No. Dead. Air.

Now, I don’t stand here today to point fingers and throw broadcast news under the bus. Online news isn’t immune from these mistakes either. How many of us have struggled to keep our live-blogs fresh with one new update after another? How often do we post reports without a third source, or even a second one, to back it up?

And then there’s social media, where we feel even more pressure to keep the public updated as quickly as possible. As we saw this week with the supposed arrests in Boston, news organizations’ social media platforms aren’t immune from the same mistakes that occur in our broadcasts or in our websites. How many of us have typed up a tweet for a major news Twitter account and hesitated before hitting the send button, wondering, what if we’ve screwed this up? And how many of us have hit the button anyway?

Errors have always been a part of journalism. Corrections are perhaps a more recent phenomenon, but thankfully someone thought they were a good idea and came up with them. Yet lately it seems whenever there’s a public discussion of major errors we’ve made covering breaking news, they’re often eclipsed by discussions of how these mistakes wouldn’t have been so bad if it hadn’t been for social media.

Social media makes for an easy target, and understandably so. Never before have we had the capacity to spread misinformation from one grapevine to the next, so broadly and so quickly. Whether it’s a mistaken tweet or Facebook post, inaccuracies take on a life of their own. But all too often I’ve heard people in our industry redirect the blame specifically to the public’s use of social media. Yes, we may have reported something wrong, but they compounded it. Or perhaps we did our jobs by not reporting a rumor, yet somehow it got out there, and now it’s everywhere because of those damn Twitter users.

Let’s face it: it’s never been easier to spread rumors. Yet it wasn’t all too long ago that these things would rarely see the light of day. We’d hear rumors while we covered a breaking story, but we could nip them in the bud. They’d be discussed in the newsroom and hopefully end up dying on the cutting room floor. We had the luxury of scrutinizing information privately. The public never need worry about a potentially damaging rumor, because we’d take care of it for them. That’s what it was all about – to report as accurately as possible and not allow the public to become misinformed. Besides, the public lacked the power to compound the problem, beyond sharing it with their immediate friends and family.

But that era is over. It no longer exists. Today, almost everyone has a device in their pocket that can capture footage or circulate information to a broader public. We no longer control the flow of information. We are no longer the media, in the most literal sense of the word, in which news happens over here, the public is over there, and we stand in the middle, sole arbiters of what gets passed across the transom and what doesn’t.

While we go about our business on air or online, the public is having its own conversations, passing along a variety of rumors. They can take on a life of their own. Some rumors that historically would’ve died on the vine now thrive online. And given the deterioration of the public’s trust of media, we should no longer be surprised when they choose to believe their friends before they believe us, even on those many occasions we’re doing a damn good job getting the story right.

Since the earliest days of journalism, our mission has been to inform the public as best we can.  But despite the incredible changes we’ve seen in media and technology, we still treat the news it as a one-way street. We try to sort out the facts, then tell everyone else what we know. I inform you, and you listen. It’s almost as if all this social media stuff didn’t exist.

But we all know that’s not true. Twitter and Facebook are as real as any community that exists offline. So what should we do, now that the public can inform each other, while simultaneously ignoring us? Should we continue to treat journalism as a one-way street, when everyone else thinks they’re chatting at a block party?

I think we need to get back to a core part of journalism, and rethink what it means to inform the public. In fact, I think one good starting point can be found within NPR’s mission statement: To create a more informed public.

Now this may sound like I’m just parsing words, and to a certain extent I probably am. But there is a difference, and it’s worth discussing. To inform the public is to tell them what we think they should know. To create a more informed public is to help them become better consumers and producers of information – and hopefully achieve their full potential as active participants in civil society.

If this is indeed a worthy goal, then why aren’t we engaging the public more directly? I don’t mean engagement like encouraging them to “like” us on Facebook or click the retweet button. That is not engagement. By engagement I mean, why don’t we use these incredibly powerful tools to talk with them, listen to them, and help us all understand the world a little better? Perhaps we can even use social media to do the exact opposite of its reputation – to slow down the news cycle, help us catch our collective breaths and scrutinize what’s happening with greater mindfulness.

When a big story breaks, we shouldn’t just be using social media to send out the latest headlines or ask people for their feedback after the fact. We shouldn’t even stop at asking for their help when trying to cover a big story. We should be more transparent about what we know and don’t know. We should actively address rumors being circulated online. Rather than pretending they’re not circulating, or that they’re not our concern, we should tackle them head-on, challenging the public to question them, scrutinize them, understand where they might have come from, and why.

When we see members of the public making claims that might be questionable or flat-out wrong, we should address them directly, asking them where they got that information and why they believe it to be true. We should help them understand what it means to confirm something, and that it’s not just sharing something you heard over Facebook from a friend of your brother-in-law.  Similarly, we should challenge the public when we see them parroting certain journalistic tropes such as “confirmed,” or “breaking” or “reports,” when in truth they may not understand the nuances that make these terms very, very different?

We now report in a networked world, where information spread by members of the public can be as consequential as information spread by the media. Just as we cannot afford to underplay our own mistakes, we can no longer afford to underplay the public’s role in propagating information. If we are going to embrace the notion of creating a more informed public, reporting is no longer enough. We must work harder to engage them, listen to them, teach them, learn from them. We must help them better producers, as well as consumers, of information.

If we wish to remain relevant in this networked world of ours, this must become a core part of our mission. It’s no longer enough to just inform people. We must do whatever we can to create this more informed public. And we can’t afford to wait until the next Newtown or Boston to begin anew.

Thank you.

A Eulogy For My Mom

February 15th, 2013

The cars lined up for the funeral procession at half past noon, a chill in the air made worse by a steady breeze. The entire cemetery was covered in a thick blanket of Massachusetts snow – acres and acres of it. As we slowly drove to the burial site, I could see a patch of green in the distance sheltered by an open-sided tent.

My mom’s casket was waiting just off the road, a group of grave diggers waiting for us to arrive.

We got out of our cars, around 25 of us total. All of our immediate family was there – my wife and kids, my brother’s family, my dad, my aunt and her family. A number of cousins on my dad’s side also joined us; they had graciously made arrangements for all the catering after the funeral. My mom originally had 50 first cousins, and over the years we’d seen the number in attendance at family events whittle down due to the inexorable passage of time and the tyranny of distance. One cousin and her husband joined us.

I had never met the rabbi before, but she was very kind, offering us condolences individually then discussing with us the order in which we planned to talk. The funeral director pinned a black ribbon on my overcoat, just over my heart. As is custom in some branches of Judaism, I immediately rended it, ripping it down the middle.

There was one row of chairs in front of the casket. I sat down with my dad, brother, aunt and uncle. Wasting little time, the rabbi began the ceremony by asking us to repeat the traditional blessing for the newly departed:

Barukh atah Adonai Eloheinu melekh ha’olam, dayan ha-emet.

Blessed are You, Lord, our God, King of the universe, the true judge.

After saying a few more words and acknowledging the immediate family that was present, I was invited to give the first eulogy. I had struggled to come up with the right words – in our family, eulogies have always been a delicate balance of humility and humor, and I knew this was the only chance I’d ever get to eulogize Mom. So I decided to focus on something she said to me not long ago:

When Mom and I first talked last month about her reaching the final stages of ovarian cancer, I commented on how she had beaten the odds of what was initially a very grave diagnosis, and had survived for 19 more years, well beyond any length of time we could have dreamed of.

“Not 19,” she corrected me. “It’s been 18 years and change. So much for 18 supposedly being good luck.” In Hebrew, the number 18 also spells out the word chai, which means “life” – as in the traditional toast, l’chaim.

“But it was good luck,” I replied without hesitation. “18 good years that your doctors never expected you’d ever have.”

And she took full advantage of those 18 years, whenever and however she could.

First, if any of you have gone out to dinner with my mom, you’d probably experienced one family tradition: those innumerable plates of food she asked to have sent back to the kitchen. Too cold, too undercooked, too overcooked, not what she thought she ordered, not the way they used to make it before the new owner changed the menu. If it wasn’t what she had expected, she’d flat-out reject it.

Could it be embarrassing? Sure – though even I am known to do the same thing every now and then. But Mom knew she didn’t have that much time left on earth, so she wasted none of it. Why have a bad meal when you don’t know how many good meals you had in front of you? Besides, there were those innumerable glasses of white wine expecting to wash down something or another.

She lived her life to the fullest. There were the two dozen cruises she’d taken over the last 18 years with my dad, my aunt and my uncle. And countless countries visited, too: Panama, Columbia, Spain, Portugal, Croatia, Sweden, Russia, Turkey, Israel, Japan and China. And those are just the ones that come to mind.

Over those 18 years, there were more than 35,000 sweepstakes entries she’d sent out – give or take – a few of which actually paid dividends.

There were the five final seasons of Seinfeld, some of which were pretty good. The 94 episodes and two god-awful movie versions of Sex and the City. And at last count, 224 episodes of NCIS, not including the LA spin-off.

And then there were the things that really counted:

Eric and I each getting married, bringing Kim and Susanne – the two daughters she’d never had, she often said of them – into her life.

The three grandchildren – Kayleigh, Sean and Sophie – three grandchildren she never thought she’d live long enough to meet.

The close friendship she developed with my mother-in-law, Mary.

The countless evenings she spent with her friends over a bottle of wine at home.

The three cats and the 130-pound dog who tried to sit in her lap whenever she visited my house.

The 15 more years she cherished with her mom, my grandmother Theresa, before she passed away six months shy of her 95th birthday.

The 18 more years with her sister Brenda and her family, including the birth of six grand nieces and nephews.

The 18 additional hours she and I had to visit one last time, after Delta abruptly canceled my flight home to DC due to mechanical difficulties two weeks ago.

The 18 precious, wonderful, additional years she spent with my dad.

18 good years. 18 years of good luck.

So Mom, as you sit down for your first of many heavenly meals with Grandma and Grandpa, I have no doubt you’ll still exercise your right to send the food back. After fighting the good fight for 18 years, you’ve earned it.

L’chaim, Mom.

——–

The obituary for my mom that ran in the Boston Globe, February 13, 2013:

Nancy Ellen Carvin, 69, of Indian Harbour Beach, FL, passed away at home on February 11, 2013 after a long battle with cancer.

Nancy was born in Cambridge, MA on December 21, 1943 and grew up in nearby Chelsea with her parents, Simon and Theresa Kaplan, and her sister Brenda. The family later moved to Worcester, MA, where she attended Classical High School. Nancy enrolled at Temple University in Philadelphia, where she studied art history and social work.

Returning to Boston after graduation, she married Robert Carvin of Brookline, MA. After having two sons, Andy and Eric, the family moved to Indialantic, FL, where she worked first as a travel agent for the Burdines department store and later as a configuration manager at Harris Corporation. In 1994, at the age of 50, Nancy was diagnosed with terminal ovarian cancer but was determined to fight the disease.

Over the next 18 years, she proudly saw both of her sons, Andy and Eric, marry and have children of their own: Kayleigh, Sean and Sophie. She also traveled the world with her husband, visiting places as diverse as Colombia, Croatia, Turkey, Egypt, Israel and China. Nancy is survived by her sister, husband, sons, grandchildren and daughters-in-law Susanne Carvin and Kim Noble, along with countless nieces, nephews and friends.

Her funeral will take place on Friday, February 15 at 12:45 pm at Sharon Memorial Park, 120 Canton Street, Sharon, MA. Family and friends will gather nearby after the funeral at the home of Donald and Sandra Carvin; maps will be distributed at the service.

In lieu of flowers, the family encourages donations in Nancy’s memory to The Women’s Center In Brevard County, FL, or a favorite cancer charity.

The Gay Girl In Damascus That Wasn’t

June 20th, 2011

Dizzy, 10 Years Since He Joined Our Family

April 24th, 2011

Easter Basket Booty

April 24th, 2011

Remembering “My Kennedy,” 25 Years After The Challenger Explosion

January 28th, 2011

I can’t believe it’s 25 years to the day since the Space Shuttle Challenger exploded. I remember it as if it were yesterday. I remember seeing it with my own eyes.

In January 1986, I was an eighth-grader at a junior high school in Indialantic, Florida. Like so many other kids in my community, I’d grown up with the space program. The launch pads of Cape Canaveral were around 40 miles north of my house, just north of the barrier island that I called home.

I’d probably seen at least 20 of the previous space shuttle launches, going back to STS-1 in April 1981, when John Young and Robert Crippen piloted the Enterprise. The local newspaper even ran a picture of me on its front page awaiting that first launch, eagerly scanning the sky with my parents’ binoculars. John Young had even come to my elementary school to dedicate a mural we’d created in honor of NASA.

Growing up along the Space Coast, you couldn’t avoid a shuttle launch; if you didn’t happen to be outside to follow the flame and the contrail coursing through the sky, the sonic boom would rattle the neighborhood with such resonance that it would vibrate your doors and set off car alarms.

Our community was immersed in NASA culture, whether or not your individual families contributed to it directly. My elementary school had been named after the Gemini program; our rival high school was named Satellite High. The establishing shot for the TV show “I Dream of Jeannie” – the building with the rockets in front of it – was filmed just north of us at Patrick Air Force Base. A neighbor friend of mine even had a life-size mockup of a Gemini mission capsule in his garage, left over from when a NASA engineer lived in the house. We’d played inside it so many times, flipping every switch in every conceivable combination, that eventually we just used it as a clubhouse to swap baseball cards.

During my lunch period at school that chilly morning in January 1986, the space shuttle Challenger was scheduled to launch. Normally if a launch were taking place at that time, I’d eat quickly and wait outside to catch the entire take-off. That day, though, I wasn’t in a rush. It was ridiculously cold outside, to the point where there had been a frost warning the previous night for the orange crops. The native Bostonian in me had become so acclimatized to Florida weather that I didn’t want to be outside in such frigid temperatures. To complicate matters, I had a big test later that day and wasn’t particularly prepared, so I kept my head buried in a text book while scarfing down lunch.

As lunch period wrapped up, I figured I’d poke my head outside, just in case the launch had taken place. I didn’t expect to see anything, since I couldn’t imagine they’d proceed with a launch in such cold temperatures. Stepping out the front doors of the school, a small group of students was staring slightly upwards, facing due north. No one was talking. I looked up, expecting to see either nothing or the shuttle barreling towards space, its contrail arcing gently through the sky like the world’s largest lowercase letter r.

What I saw, though, didn’t make any sense.

The contrail was shaped like a gargantuan capital Y, as if two stunt jets had flown in a tight formation and then parted in separate directions. The two contrails subdivided again and again, a weeping willow-like fractal pattern splitting into hundreds of faint lines, all drifting slowly downward towards the ocean.

I walked back into the school, unable to process what I had just witnessed. Throughout the hallways, students wrapped up the final lunch period and were making their way to their next class. There just seemed to be more commotion than usual. I was settling in for my French class when a friend of mine came up to my desk and said, “Someone just told me the shuttle blew up.”

I shrugged and told him it was crazy. My head still hadn’t processed what my eyes had just witnessed.

Sitting in French class, confused and in denial, I half-expected the period to begin as it always did. Instead, the school principal came over the PA system and announced, with great emotion in his voice, that the Space Shuttle Challenger had exploded about a minute after takeoff.

Most of the class sat there, stunned. A few students began to cry. Others rushed out the door without asking permission, no doubt eager to get to the main office and call home to check if their parents – NASA employees – were safe. I asked my teacher if I could be excused. She just nodded her head in silence.

I left the classroom and went straight to the small media lab in the school library. It was probably the only place in school outside the principal’s office that had a television, and I just couldn’t sit in class not knowing exactly what had happened. I needed to learn more. Every channel covered the disaster non-stop, but the coverage was all chaos – no one knew what caused the explosion or if the astronauts could have survived. It certainly appeared that it had been a fatal accident. I kept thinking of those hundreds of delicate contrails I’d seen outside, descending inexorably towards the sea. Which of those hauntingly beautiful weeping willow branches trailed the astronauts’ launch chamber in their final moments of life?

I must have sat in the media lab for two, three, four hours. I honestly don’t know. Time flowed into irrelevancy that afternoon. At some point, my American history teacher, who happened to be my French teacher’s husband, came into the room. Normally a real jokester who couldn’t stop talking, he was grave and somber, silently watching the television with me. It must have been his planning period, I thought, but I never asked him; I couldn’t keep my eyes off the TV.

He then grabbed his class materials and began to walk out the door. I looked back and we made eye contact for the first time that day.

“This is your Kennedy,” he said, glassy-eyed, closing the door as he left.

Eventually, the school day came to an end. Many students had departed earlier. There was no point in staying in the media lab any longer when I could get on my bike and go home.

Stepping outside, I looked one more time in the direction of the weeping willow contrails. Incredibly, they were still hanging in the air, as if the explosion had occurred moments earlier. Normally, a shuttle’s contrail evaporates within an hour of takeoff, if not sooner. But the air was so cold and calm that particular day, it remained etched in the sky, as if to etch in our memory – or scar into it – what we had just witnessed.

I’ve thought about the Challenger disaster countless times since then; the events of that day were so formative to my teenage years that I even wrote my college entrance essay about it. The Challenger explosion was indeed my Kennedy. As the JFK assassination had been for my parents, and September 11 would later be to the generation after me, the Challenger disaster was one of those rare life-altering events for which you remember exactly where you were and what you were doing at that particular moment – whether you wanted to remember that moment or not.

Creepy pic of me projected on a building in San Francisco

January 17th, 2011

Bernie Sanders’ Filibuster, As Performed By An Animated Puppy

December 14th, 2010

Once the transcript of Bernie Sanders’ 124-page, nine-hour, one-man filibuster came out, I thought it would be fun to make an animated movie out of it using Xtranormal.com. Unfortunately, Xtranormal sort of explodes when you post more than 20,000 characters, which amounts to just the first six pages of the filibuster transcript. Nonetheless, it’s kinda fund seeing and hearing the filibuster as told by a cute puppy. Or is that a teddy bear? No, it’s a puppy.


Recipe: Andy’s Black Bean Chipotle Cinnamon Pale Ale Turkey Chili

November 30th, 2010

Tonight I made perhaps my best chili yet. Here’s the recipe.

Ingredients:

1 lb of ground turkey
1 large red pepper, diced
1 large green pepper, diced
1 medium zucchini, diced
2 large carrots, diced
2 medium yellow onions, diced
2 cloves garlic, diced
1 large can (29 oz) of diced tomato
1 large can (29 oz) of black beans
1 tsp cumin
½ tsp cinnamon
1 tablespoon honey
1 packet of Ortega Chipotle Taco Powder
2 bottles of pale ale or similar hoppy beer
salt
pepper
olive oil
1 tsp corn starch
1 cup cold water
Shredded cheddar cheese for garnish

Optional:
1 small can of chipotle peppers, finely diced (to use instead of taco powder, if desired)
1 tablespoon cocoa powder

Instructions:

In a nonstick pan, spray some cooking spray then brown one pound of ground turkey at medium high heat, breaking it up and stirring until cooked through. Set aside.

Dice two medium onions, setting aside a generous handful to use as garnish. Also dice the peppers, garlic cloves, carrots and zucchini.

In a large pot, warm one tablespoon of olive oil at medium high heat. Add a pinch of salt and one teaspoon of fresh ground pepper, then 1 teaspoon of cumin. Let the spices sizzle for 30 seconds, then add the diced garlic and onions, not including the onion you set aside as a garnish. Stir to coat the onions with the olive oil, then cover the pot and let it sit for 5-10 minutes until onions begin to become translucent. Incorporate the diced peppers and stir occasionally for 5 minutes.

Add the cooked ground turkey. Pour one pale ale into the pot, then pour the other one for yourself. Incorporate the can of diced tomatoes and the black beans, including all the juices. Add the honey, cinnamon and the cocoa powder (the last one is optional, but it will add more complexity to the overall flavor). Add the packet of taco powder or the can of chipotle peppers. Add the zucchini, then stir.

Cover, then let simmer at medium heat for 20 minutes. Drink the other pale ale, then add the diced carrots, cover again, and simmer for an additional 20 minutes. All the vegetables in the chili should be sauteed, but the carrots should have some crunch to them, which is why you don’t want to add them any earlier.

Take one tablespoon of corn starch and combine with one cup of cold water until fully dissolved. Slowly pour the resulting mix into the pot, stirring as you go. The corn starch will help thicken the chili. Let it simmer for at least one more minute.

Ladle two cups of the chili into a bowl, then sprinkle with a dash of fresh ground pepper, a small handful of shredded cheese and some of the diced onions. Goes well with more pale ale, or a bold red wine.

Serves four, plus generous leftovers, as it’ll taste even better on the second or third night. Hope you enjoy it – and please let me know how it turns out.

Tag Cloud Of PubCamp Introductions

November 20th, 2010

This morning at the start of PubCamp, we went around the room and had everyone introduce themselves, using three words or phrases to describe themselves. Mark Stencel kept track of around 50 of these introductions, and I’ve taken the liberty of putting all those words into Wordle.net to create a tag crowd. These are the results.