Newspaper editors with beams in their eye

A cold morning. Your Grumpy Old Journalist remained in bed, reading the morning papers, when he cames across this – the second editorial in today's Sydney Morning Herald:

An hour later, at 6am, I heard the wonderfully warm voice of Angela Catterns on ABC radio 702, reading out the headlines from the Herald, and then those from the Telegraph and the Weekend Australian. Naming them all.

The Herald calls this “filching”?

You cannot buy advertising on ABC radio. Why would you want to, when the ABC gives it away free? And yet the Herald is indignant?

It's true that many newsbreaking Herald stories – and other newspapers' exclusives, too – saturate the airwaves and the blogosphere for days. As the story develops, journalists and commentators tend not to acknowledge the original source of the story.

Before the Herald editors become too wound up, they could reach down the office Bible and turn to Matthew 7:3:

And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

[That's the King James version. Modern Bible translations use “speck” or “piece of sawdust” instead of “mote”, as this details.]

The editors could then turn back to a story they published on May 7 about Mick Keelty's resignation, and then read my post of the same day, “Keelty – getting the facts right”. In that post, I noted phrases in the newspaper report were the same as those in an earlier post of mine ( “This time, Mick Keelty must do the honourable thing and resign” on August 30, 2008). The Herald even repeated an error I'd failed to correct.

Most bloggers give idealistic support to the free exchange of ideas, and let others pick up, discuss, and disseminate their views. Under my profile over on the side, I assert copyright over material in this blog, but also say anyone is welcome to use the material, although I'd appreciate acknowledgement and a link.

The big non-profits on the internet do need a formal legal arrangement, and provide their content to other users under a GNU or a Creative Commons licence. (Wikipedia switched last week, and this article explains the different licences.)

Commercial publishers, like Fairfax, the owner of the Herald, do need copyright to protect what is, after all, their property. They owe it to their shareholders. But when an ethical blogger – such as, ahem, this old journo – picks up their material, acknowledges its source, and provides a link back to the Herald's online story, everyone's a winner.

The Herald seems to be becoming tougher, and more selfish on the internet.

On April 13, the well-regarded media blog Mumbrella accused Fairfax Digital Media of being a bad internet citizen by “ failing to contribute to the ecosystem of the blogosphere.”

That sounds a bit precious, but the blogger says Fairfax online stories provide clickable links only to its own sites – if a story does mention an external site, it won't provide the link. You have to key it in yourself. The Mumbrella blogger wrote:

Fairfax seems to prefer to treat its [online] readers a bit like a jealous man who tries to stop his girlfriend from meeting other men in the hope that this will protect the relationship. One Fairfax journo told me that the management “aren’t keen on linking outside”.

You'll find the Mumbrella blog here. It's worth reading, especially for Fairfax editors (although first, they may have to remove the beams from their eyes).

.

Reaching out to the world

Back when ol' grumpy thought he could run three related blogs at once, he used this clip art as a theme logo when adding new links to his now-disused What? Me Grumpy? blog.

I wanted to go beyond the usual exchange of links between friendly bloggers – although that remains a factor – and try to provide something of real value to my readers. I'm reviving the idea for my surviving, core blog, and this "shaking hands" logo will appear when I add new links and explain why.

A few of my links are quirky. Desert Candy is there not just because I enjoy Middle Eastern food, but also because I like the blogger and her philosophy. Four Candles, because it's just the tonic if you're feeling down.

The AJA Code of Ethics to show what to expect of me.

Woy Woy Steve gets a guernsey not just because he's helped me with encouragement and advice (and provided a link to Grumpy Old Journo), but because my friends who live on the Woy Woy peninsula will find his site informative.

I had a link to Barista well before blogger David Tiley offered a long, supportive comment. I believe his "heartstarter for the hungry mind" blog is worth a few minutes of your time.

Blogs come and go. The long-running Road to Surfdom switched off late last year. To replace it in my links, I'm adding Larvatus Prodeo, a moderate Left blog which now offers a platform for contributors who share its philosophy. [This link should take you a Larvatus post about Surfdom's demise and about the continuing need for independent blogging.]

While checking for Larvatus's web address, I came across homepageDAILY. It's been around since May 2007, but it's still under development in a beta version. It describes its aims:

HomepageDAILY presents the best of the net, updated each day to take you behind the headlines. We offer original content and views beyond the news, including videos and breaking stories from media mavericks, bedroom bloggers and global icons. HPD serves up the soul of the web, so you don't have to gag on the scraps.

HPD is complex, fully featured and professionally designed – a little too much for the average web surfer, perhaps –but it looks like a valuable tool for the savvy internet user. The link above will take you to HPD's "About Us" page. When I set up a link over on the side, it should take you to the home page instead.

I'm sure there are similar sites, and I'll list them if they come up to scratch. The general idea of a site which indexes and provides links to articles from all over is not new – Arts & Letters Daily has been doing it for years. If one wanted to fault ALD, it's that there's too much of it.

Perhaps we small independent bloggers could get together and do something similar. Nothing as ambitious as HPD or ALD. But perhaps we could agree on a way to assemble a brief, simple daily email and send it to our supporters.

Note added Wed, January 15: I've just gone back to check HPD, and found a link to this useful advice for independent bloggers.

Which way now? The questions Grumpy Old Journo must ask himself

This is an incomplete draft, an outline of my thoughts as I consider the future of this blog. As they develop, I'll return to flesh them out. I'd welcome any suggestions as we go along.

If you read my New Year's Eve thoughts (two posts back, "Even in the down times, we can make this a bright new year") you'll know I've been down about the failure of Grumpy Old Journo to attract readers. If you read the comments to that post, you'll see that two experienced internet posters responded with generous and helpful advice.

I've also talked it over with a friend who is an experienced webmaster and blogger. She also was generous with sound advice – not all of which I'll take. I'm reading up on relevant topics. At present, my thinking is running on these lines:

1. The times they are a'changing

Move on. As my previous post (about the Quadrant hoax) acknowledged, Australians are now bored with tired old arguments from tired old men. But as we shift away from the conservative Right (as well as the One Nation crowd), we must guard against going over to the rent-a-crowd Left.

We're not talking just politics. We're talking about the nature of Australian society. About the Australia we hand on to our offspring. Is our future with a social democratic Left or with a resurgent, centrist wing of a Liberal Party which has rediscovered compassion? Or some hybrid yet to emerge?

Will a move to the centre make us more civil, tolerant and rational? Can we see a better future for most Australians?

Another question. Today, should a man say, "Respect me – I'm seventy years old" ? Or does he have to earn that respect in his dialogue and his dealings with people of all ages and backgrounds – people who may not share his ideas and values? Do we listen when younger writers have their say?

Some reading: In the Weekend Oz, writer Larry Buttrose expores the paths the Left could take. On Monday, letter writer Chris Curtis spells out his hopes for a Left ascendancy in Australia. Liberal Party "wet" Christopher Pyne says his party must move to the centre or die (or read his full article by downloading The Sydney Institute Quarterly).

In this post about Katherine Wilson's hoax, Crikey media commentator Margaret Simons makes it clear she believes Wilson's activism is bad journalism – yet Simons had been Wilson's supervisor for an honours thesis on – wait for it – Advocacy and Journalism.

To show how we ignore young writers, Simons posted this link to a Melbourne Age article of May 27, 2007, which included :

Behind the scenes of Australian cultural life there's a revolution going on, but editors of mainstream publications just don't seem to know it. As the first edition of Gangland argued, the issue at the heart of this revolution isn't simply to do with age.

It's to do with the way Australian culture remains stuck in the 1970s, reliant on backwards-looking aesthetics and modes of understanding, unwilling to add new voices and ideas to mainstream discussion. It's to do with the enormous amount of pent-up energy and will for change and renewal, for new solutions to old problems, that have remained unheard for too long.

2. Is there still a place for a conversational blog?

Both Woy Woy Steve and my friend urge me to specialise on a topic. My friend says Grumpy Old Journo spends too much time on what she calls chat over the back fence. Yet I still like the idea of blogging as a conversation between intelligent people with varied interests. Many of the blogs I enjoy lighten up at times with domestic trivia. I'll think some more about this.

3. Keep up with technology

The old style blogs, such as this one, are easy to post – which allows the blogger to concentrate on content. But with high-powered and heavily promoted newspaper blogs muscling in, amateur bloggers may need to keep up with new technology to promote their offerings. That may mean RSS feeds, posts to Twitter and perhaps Facebook, videos on YouTube, and a better understanding of how search engines work.

Twitter describes itself on this page. People post messages of 140 characters or less, beginning with one simple question: What are you doing? It sounds childish, but look at this dramatic coverage of Bangkok riots. Learn about Stilgherrion, then explore his blog.

And check this out in the American Journalism Review: "Can Facebook and Twitter save the beleaguered mainstream media? Maybe not by themselves. But news organisations increasingly are turning to social networking tools in their efforts to compete in a challenging and fast-changing media landscape."

4. Develop networks with like-minded bloggers

Co-operation between bloggers is already common with the exchange of links, but it's possible like-minded bloggers could do much more for mutual benefit. I hope to expand on this idea after chatting to other bloggers.

5. How much time, and how much ability?

Blogging can become obsessive. Is that the way you want to go? Keep time to have a life. You'll be a more interesting blogger if you do. Have fun. If it's not fun, why are you doing it?

6. Write for your readers

Keep your readers in mind. Don't talk down to them, try to understand their interests and how your writing should engage them. That's basic journalism, but let's face it – blogging does make it too easy to preach.

7. Keep to a posting schedule

Woy Woy Steve emphasised this. Even if I can post only once a month, make it a regular, scheduled day. If I fail, post a note to explain what's happening.

As I said, these are preliminary thoughts. Please come back and see how they develop.

Cassandra or Pollyanna

I've re-read last Saturday's post carefully, because I'm worried that a friend I trust feels I've become too negative (you may read her comments at the end of Saturday's post). I showed it to my wife Merry, too, and she agreed with my friend.

They have a point, when you count my relentless mockery of Prime Minister John Howard. Generally, I'll stand by what I wrote last time, although I do admit some of it was over the top, a little was mean-spirited, and worst of all, there was too much of it.

But hey, I'm talking about politicians. Robust disputation is part of their trade. They dish it out, and they expect to cop it.

I'm still sceptical about Malcolm Turnbull's claim that “the whole climate change phenomenon has informed and underpinned the policies of the Australian Government for more than a decade,” but in fairness, here's a link to an article he wrote for the Daily Telegraph on the matter.

Did I go over the top when I brought in a reference to 1984's Ministry of Truth? Of course, but this is a blog, not an academic treatise. Think of it as the text equivalent of a newspaper cartoon.

Nor do I think I'm unfair with my comments about Howard's laggardly conversion on climate change, and his parliamentary stumble on Tuesday did not surprise me. I believe political editor Peter Harcher's comments in the Sydney Morning Herald yesterday back up my comments.

I guess I over-did it when I went on to mock Howard's ultimatum to George Dubya to charge David Hicks or release him. A more sober approach would be to analyse his commitment to the rule of law, given that Hicks is likely to have suffered more than six years of near-torture before he faces a military tribunal of dubious competence on dubious charges.

Oh dear, I'm still a bit negative. I promise to try harder. Shorter blogs, more wit, and some generosity.

Actually, I thought I'd been doing reasonably well, ending my last post about making fig jam, and before that a piece suggesting we should celebrate Orgy Day on February 6 instead of Australia Day on January 26, more about my fig tree, and a yarn about my encounter with a junkie prostitute whom I liked.

Should I be Pollyanna, the child in a 1913 novel who brought gladness wherever she went? Or should I continue to delude myself that I'm Cassandra from Greek mythology, with the gift of foreseeing the future, but also the curse that no-one will believe me?