Comments on: Innovation is a bumpy road but journalism needs it

By: Is (digital) journalism better the more local it is and what does that do to growth? « DigiDave - Journalism is a Process, Not a Product

Sun, 05 Apr 2009 03:22:36 +0000

[...] obviously goes back to the Rob Curley fiasco of LoudounExtra from a few weeks ago, which can (and was) dissected in every way [...]

By: Elise

Elise — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 22:58:02 +0000

Here’s our take on the situation, from the very front lines of Loudoun County’s Internet Marketing and Publishing 2.0 battles….

http://www.dullessouthonline.com/loudoun_county_gateway/2008/06/loudoun-extra-welcome-to-neighborhood.html

By: Patrick Yen

Patrick Yen — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 20:03:58 +0000

I love innovation. I love to innovate.
Life would be pretty boring if it wasn’t for innovation and innovators.

Especially American innovators..
America generally has a rich history and culture of innovation,
so it’s sad to not see that trickle more into our journalism industry.

As for journalism, most of it isn’t very innovative.
Print journalism had remained virtually unchanged for decades.

It has a culture and foundation strongly grounded in both tradition and authority.
Highly structured, highly regulated, highly risk-averse.

Groups are inherently conservative, opposed to change.
Thus, “group-think” is inherently counter-progressive.

To be progressive in the field of journalism, to attempt to make it better,
you must be a rebel. You must be an ‘iconoclast.’

I’ll be willing to argue that the more innovative you are,
the more enemies you will naturally make in the field of journalism.

Here is a quote from Steve Jobs,

“Your time is limited, so don’t waste it living someone else’s life. Don’t be trapped by dogma — which is living with the results of other people’s thinking. Don’t let the noise of others’ opinions drown out your own inner voice. And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. They somehow already know what you truly want to become. Everything else is secondary.”

news-service.stanford.edu/news/2005/june15/jobs-061505.html

An example of one of my most recent stabs at ‘innovation’ can be viewed here:
Americandiversityproject.org/2008/multimedia/pikeville/

It is just part of a more comprehensive multimedia piece which can be viewed here:
Americandiversityproject.org/2008/multimedia/

It was a non-profit project, produced without funding and for no pay.
Limited time and resources prevented a more comprehensive and complete, holistic coverage of Pikeville Kentucky, but I think we did a decent job considering our circumstances.

When producing the intro video, I took a more ‘literary’ or poetic approach,
trying to give a small town of about 6500 more appeal to a global audience.
Call it “hyperglobal” if you will.

Is it too abstract? I would love to hear your thoughts, Dr. Thornton.

By: Ted McGee

Ted McGee — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 20:02:01 +0000

Innovation is important in journalism, as it is important in other fields. Without innovation, we would not have some of the great things that are constantly being produced and improved, like microwaves, socks, Dell, and shoes (just to name a few). I have stressed innovation to some of my friends but often they say “no, ted, innovation is wrong, etc.” I want them to know that they are wrong, but I am right. Yes.

By: Jeffrey A. Haines’ Blog » Blog Archive » Learning from setbacks

Jeffrey A. Haines’ Blog » Blog Archive » Learning from setbacks — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 15:10:52 +0000

[...] In the past week, Rob Curley has faced a lot of criticism about the project he has been working on the past few years, and even some that seems to attack and question his whole career. [...]

By: links for 2008-06-10 « David Black

links for 2008-06-10 « David Black — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 02:36:38 +0000

[...] Innovation is a bumpy road but journalism needs it – The Journalism Iconoclast “That’s how innovation happens. Trial and error are our friends, not our enemies.” (tags: internet newspapers newspapersites hyperlocal participatory journalism innovation loudonextra washingtonpost) [...]

By: mark van patten

mark van patten — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 17:55:10 +0000

I’m not questioning Curley’s Louden adventure, I’m criticizing his whole career.
Anybody can “innovate” when given carte blanche, which Curley enjoyed. Once he had that from Lawrence, he was the golden boy.
My point was not against innovation. It was against not holding the “innovator” accountable. Curley brought nothing radical to the table, he only integrated what existed.
Hardly an innovator.
As far as giving Louden time? There is no time. In internet years, they have had their time. It didn’t work, so don’t be married to the idea, boot it, and move on.