-
Website
http://technosailor.com -
Original page
http://technosailor.com/2006/08/17/alienating-the-longtail-how-to-win-a-popularity-contest/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
In the background of all of this, Easton and I had been sending a flurry of emails back and forth and he was rapidly convincing me of HIS sincerity.
I had decided not to post my open letter to KMM and Chartreuse until Loren Feldman appeared on the scene. This guy has re-ignited this whole issue big time.
I stayed in New Orleans for the storm. I paddled by canoe to my house in Lakeview which was under 10 feet of water. I worked pet rescue for days and carried holstered pistols at my hip for weeks... and these guys come down and start cursing me and telling me and my fellow New Orleans bloggers that we're hurting our recovery and then slipping in their resume.
I'm pretty sure that old Loren there would not have been too pleased if I'd shown up in New York after 9/11 and tried to sell t-shirts to the cops and firefighters.
Thanks.
First, thanks for stopping by.
Second, I never accused you of profiteering. My gripe, having gone to the gulf coast after the storm, is at least the perception that this escapade is actually having the reverse intended result. It is actually exploiting the victims of this storm. Shame on you for not wanting to talk to bloggers as well as those who don't have a net connection. It's selective journalism. You should be talking to a cross section of views, not just ones you hand pick.
Everybody else has accused of us making money. I can't control perception. The real shame is not on me but the NO bloggers for attacking from the get go. From the beginning we wanted to involve them. But after weeks of bullshit attacks I've decided that there would be no point to it. Are the bloogers the only ones entitled to a voice? They have their blogs. What about the people who don't have blogs. Are their thoughts less valid or important?
You DO have control over what kind of perception people have. If you don't think you have control over perception, then why the hell are you doing this? You have control of how you respond to others, both critics and endorsers. You have control over how you conduct your investigation. You have control over the words you use in your reporting.
Again, I challenge you to find a place where I accuse you of profiteering. Maybe others have. I have not. I do think this is a publicity stunt and I doubt the credibility of a claim to objective journalism.
It's up to YOU, my man, to talk to all the people involved, including bloggers. Even if you don't cite them, you need to control good will.
Trust me when I say I'm not against you. I'm not your enemey. Every post I've written in this arena has been to plead for objectivity and putting your own profile (you and those involved) aside. If you want a story, you can find one. If you want a quality story, you'll need to sacrifice to get it.
People are going to be critical - and that's fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion.
But keep in mind what these folks have gone through and respond accordingly.
Matt
I never said you were accusing us, I said many others are. We met and had a discussion at wordcamp, I found you to be intelligent, serious and sincere. I know that you are coming from a good place. But the truth of the matter is that you can't control perception. From the get go we never had a chance. There are many people in New Orleans in addition to bloggers. That's who we will focus on.
Personally, I would have to say "citizen journalists" need to be held to a HIGHER standard than professional journalists.
Nice way to try to draw hits rather than continue to address to issue.
As far as trying to involve locals from the begining, that is a flat out untruth, all you need to do is read the threads already up to see that.
BTW, statement has two T's in it...
I've had a great experience talking with several amazing human beings who happen to people who have blogs and live in the New Orleans area. Some of them didn't understand who started NewOrleansTruth or why. Now more of them do. I would put GulfSails in that category. And I would include myself in the category of those who didn't properly investigate or appreciate the contributions of OLA bloggers like him. Over the past few days I've read through his blog archives. I've visited dozens of NOLA blogs and subscribed to their feeds. I've put links to non-profit organizations, conferences and related blogs at NewOrleansTruth. I've posted a couple of times and explained how to find information about the subject. Yes, it's meager, but it's the best I've known how to do. I'm grateful for the patience of GulfSails and others who have been willing to listen and talk, listen and talk, and try to come to an understanding here.
We all need to be very careful not to spread misinformation on this subject. I've been guilty of it myself a few times, specifically by being too vague in my descriptions of Know More Media's intents. But now I think I've managed to clear up the confusion somewhat and I'll keep working towards that end.
It would be a great waste of time, energy and opportunity if we - venturing a step forward here, I'm saying "we" meaning everyone involved in this and related conversations - were to give up NewOrleansTruth.com and efforts like it. For better or worse, it has a few people's attention. Where do we go from here? At the least, we can try to publish some posts that encourage honest, thoughtful conversation about post-Katrina New Orleans and Gulf Coast life, and also that motivate peopel to learn more from other websites and blogs and also to do more to improve the world.
Gulfsails rode out the storm, and was blogging during it. He was one of the few news sources many of us had during the storm.
The "no media in FEMA camps" that started this whole thing was pounced on by the NOLA blog community, and FEMA changed their policy within 2 days.
My personal objection was that if this whole "team new orleans" had done a bit of research, they would have known this stuff, and could then have made slightly more informed decisions.
As it is, their cries of finding "the ground truth" led many of us believe that they simply had done no basic research.
I totally agree with the gist of Mr. Ellsworth's comment above. He, unlike Mr. Feldman, seems to be getting it.
Those statements right there shot what little credibility these folks had right into the trash can. At least for me it did.
It's the writer's equivalent to "I'm taking my toys and going home!"
Being the parent of a five year old, I'm all too well-acquainted with tantrums, but at least from a five year old, it's normal behavior.
I wish Mr. Feldman and his group the best of luck in "finding the truth", but I daresay the "my way or the highway" attitude probably contributed more to the destruction of New Orleans than anything FEMA ever did.
This trip was about me verifying some informtion I heard. That's it.
I felt no responsibility to get any bloggers involved or anyone else who didn't volenteer.
Why should I? It was my own personal crusade to find my own answers to my own questions.
I told everyone involved not to say anything else about it until the editing is complete. (I am breaking my own rule!)
I preach on my blog about the power of individuals. I also try to practice what I preach. I had some issues and went and answered them in my own way.
Sorry if it hurt some folks feelings. But I really don't feel myself or anyone else involved should have to appologize for doing nothing wrong.
If this was indeed your motive then the following should have happened:
1) You should not have blogged about throwing in your own $1000 to have someone go down. There's nothing that screams "publicity" like publically doing what you did.
2) You should have reigned in Stormin' Loren early on before he started telling off locals.
Keep it real, mate. You could have prevented a tailspin long ago but in classic Chartreuse mode, you chose to not find middle ground when it was apparent middle ground was needed. See the women of wordcamp argument on your blog as a second example. Instead of holding yourself up as "right", whatever that means, you could try to work with the people who are dissenting.
It's as always your choice.
Aaron, very wise advice. I do think that being able to put aside being "right" comes with age and being knocked around by life a few times -- two things perhaps the New Orleans group needs.
One at a time.
If you look in the comments of the WOW posts you'll see that I took down the picture of the person complaining immediately.
What I didn't sucumb to was the chorus of folks who wanted me to tag pictures their way.
I don't think bowing down to a few loud people is finding a middle ground.
It's the same with this New Orleans trip. A few loud bloggers had a problem with it.
I received many emails from some very high places who told me to just ignore them. Which is what I did.
One of the things I learned about fights on the internet. It is very easy to be big and loud. People fall into a trap when they start ignoring themselves and listening to the noise instead of looking at the facts.
I was very open about the New Orleans trip and The WOW post. The facts were laid out very clear.
The only thing that changed was that 6 bloggers (that's right 6) decided that the trip wasn't a good idea.
I was supposed to change what I was doing because of 6 people?
And there problem wasn't with me but with the way The Blog Herald presented it.
But I refuse to critisize the Herald or anyone else involved in my project. They could present things any way they want.
The facts and what I had to say has been on my blog for all to see.
Trying to control other media (and we are all media these days) isn't what I do.
By having them involved, the price I pay is dealing with the fallout of what they say.
So be it.
They were brave enough to stand by me so the least I could do is stand by them, weather it's Loren, Tne Blog Herald, or anyone else involved. I may not agree but I won't critisize publicly.
But the sad part to me was the few people, and it was only a few, who at first supported the project but then changed their minds and started accusing me of things like doing it for publicity, etc. (And I'm not talking about you bcause I don't remember hearing from you when I annouced it.)
The funny part is I was the only one who didn't change. I said what I was going to do from the giddyup and that's that.
The same with the WOW post. I say what I'm going to do and that's that.
Middle ground is very important in some cases. But it is also important sometimes to stand your ground. Or you'll be forced to follow the whims of everyone.
Thanks for indulging this chat. First my issue was never with you, but I do question the double talk you're making here.
Secondly, I don't think the idea is a bad idea. Never did. In fact, in my original post I say, "Okay so first of all I’ll commend for Char and all the folks contributing funds to this adventure."
There were at least six vocal bloggers who argued against the idea for whatever reason. They made a point that you didn't want to accept.
Now you say in your first comment here:
and follow it in your second comment with:
So (and I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, but to be honest I didn't like this stunt from the get go, but I did keep my mouth shut), why are you at all getting involved at this point? Why did you blog about throwing money at it? If this is journalism, and I feel thats either what it's intended to be or it's something that is at least being felt out here, then why do you send these guys with an agenda to prove?That's what we call bullshit journalism and that is what I'm calling you folks on. I don't care about all the other stuff - money, fame. Not so much. Who cares? Why the bullshit journalism though? You have an agenda and that makes this trip INVALID.
Just callin' 'em as I see 'em.
I don't see the double talk.
I sent them there for one reason. To verify if what was in the email I recieved was true or not.
I don't think that's bullshit journalism. Or maybe it is.
Was there a preconceived agenda. Sure.
But that's modern journalism.
That's FoxNews and The Huffington Post.
Are you really upset that I use spin?
I believe that Journalism, as you are looking at it, is going the way of the buggywhip.
People want credible sources, but that has a lot to do with their point of view and the point of view of the person giving them the info.
In a million channel universe you want to get the views of those that think about things as you.
Tht doesn't make what they say less valid. Just more palitable for your taste.
That is one of the reasons Om was wrong at WordCamp. Old journalism is only going to get less and less important.
Four bloggers going to New Orleans to find out how the city is surviving with media coverage a year later is journalism.
Four bloggers going to New Orleans to find out how bad FEMA and the federal government fucked the effort up and to seize on political opportunism and not get the flip side of the story, is opinion writing.
We agree about Om. We disagree about this.
Blogging is not necessarily journalism because you want it to be called journalism. Blogging can be journalism if a journalistic approach that assumes objectivity is taken.
What the guys are doing with your blessing is not journalism.
Great coversation, we agree to disagree.
Speaking of bad journalist, check this out. It deserves some publicity.
http://www.copyblogger.com/journalistic-superio...