A quick update on something that caught my eye (for those who haven't caught on, because of Spot.Us and my past involvement in NewAssignment.net, I'm a bit of a journalism nerd).
Today J-lab announced the winners of a new media woman's entreprenuership grant. One of the winners is Lila King at iReport, for a project called Echo which spurs both citizen journalism and walking.
I like the idea because it is grassroots and focused. I really like the "walking" angle, it gives it a context and definition - something I think citizen journalism sites need to succeed.
And this post shouldn't just be taken as one colleague patting the back of another. In the past I've actually been very critical of iReport (that video was perhaps made too early, as I note they had JUST launched). And anybody who has been reading my posts should have a sense of how cynical I've become lately.
I think this is a move in the right direction for iReport. Earlier today a graduate student researching what newspapers can do to improve their web presence asked why some of the best efforts to produce citizen journalism networks by corporate newspapers have failed.
It's a good question.
I think one part of it is that they often feel forced and corporate. Crowdsourcing, whether it's design, journalism, etc, needs to feel grassroots and organic. Even if its a large company (CNN in this case) behind the wheel - the campaigns need to feel personal.
That's the feeling Echo gave when I watched the explanatory clip. Good luck Lila.
In reading your last post and connected comments, “we haven't figured out the right incentives to motivate the people” it all comes across as though the concept of CS is being applied, or attempts are being made to fit the CS platform/principles to abstract systems that are being asked to do several things, motivate people, aggregate/filter and so on!
I have long thought that the relationship between an individual, an initiative or a collaborative process rests upon some profound realities. These realities are very much about biographies, both individual and institutional biographies.
Working processes, relationships and cultures are not created in a vacuum but originate out of deeply personal organic motives and extremely complicated relationships such as technological, cultural and societal metamorphosis predicated by generational change.
The example you used, linux, is certainly a good one because there one can very easily see the incentives that supported the working processes.
Surely the motivating factors or incentives for any CS participant have been seeded by deep roots and from impulses that both influence individual life path decisions and common interests.
The magic formula that enables any CS project to come into being must surely be closely tied to individual destiny as much as to any platform or guiding principle!
That’s why I think Shirky’s approach is so refreshing, he attempts to tap the origins of impulses rather than get hung up on the resulting symptoms.
Where are the psychologists?
Regards, Alan
Posted by: Alan Booker | July 17, 2008 at 08:58 AM
In reading your last post and connected comments, “we haven't figured out the right incentives to motivate the people” it all comes across as though the concept of CS is being applied, or attempts are being made to fit the CS platform/principles to abstract systems that are being asked to do several things, motivate people, aggregate/filter and so on!
Posted by: kraloyun | December 07, 2009 at 05:06 AM