The Perils of Tweeting

We all know about the brave Iranians who risk life and limb to tweet to the world the repression they are experiencing.

Now The Associated Press alerts us to one of the first arrests for tweeting -- in Guatemala.

Jean Anleu faces the prospect of a five-year prison sentence for a 96-character tweet urging depositors to withdraw money from and bankrupt Guatemala's rural-development bank, which he termed "the bank of the corrupt."

Authorities charged that Anleu's tweet illegally undermined trust in the nation's banking system and threw him into the pokey.

Tweets, though, have proven hard to silence. As word of Anleu's arrest spread, Twitterers donated half of his $6,200 bail.

What matters -- and how much

The local newspaper arrived today with the name "Michael" in a large headline and a picture of Michael Jackson filling the top two-thirds of the page. In the upper right-hand corner, in much smaller type, was the publication's nameplate.

I assumed that this was a fitting special section to special entertainer. It wasn't. It was the front page.

It reminded me of a lunch conversation I'd had with my adult son, also Michael, that day about what matters to people and what information they are willing to pursue. We concluded that most folks are much more interested in being entertained than in learning about the state of their world.

It's hard to recall a non-entertainment-related development receiving the prominent treatment afforded the death of a pop-music star.

I enjoy Michael Jackson's music and mourn his death, but I also mourn the death -- or, at least, critical condition -- of our priorities.

Who says so?

Experience has shown that anonymity cures timidity -- and, oftentimes, civility.

Many newspapers that require authors' identities as a condition of publishing readers' comments in their print editions have retreated from that standard online in order to drive traffic. The local publication is one of those.

At first it allowed commenters to use pseudonyms online but only after registering their true identity with the newspaper. It abandoned that requirement, though, after the website of a sister publication in another city proved far more popular with no such restriction.

Participation soared, but so did the level of offense -- with some messages so coarse and cruel they were taken down.

Now comes word that the local paper will return to insisting on identification. Not sure what prompts that, but I applaud it.

Mean-spirited messages may drive traffic but not respect or credibility.

Opinions for sale

An Associated Press item in the local newspaper caught my eye yesterday. It stated that the Federal Trade Commission is expected to approve guidelines this summer to clarify that the agency can go after bloggers -- and the companies that compensate them -- for false claims or failure to disclose conflicts of interest.

And here I thought that blogging was all about expressing one's honest opinions. Apparently, according the FTC, some bloggers are being rewarded for some less-than-honest opinions.

Sort of reminiscent of the instances of the past few years when commentators were found to be on the government payroll and television stations were airing government propaganda designed to look like news.

As ever, money corrupts.

Intellectual waterboarding

In reference to the volume of material to be read, a classmate the other day used the phrase "drinking from a fire hose." Two weeks into two classes compressed from 13 to eight weeks and trying to digest scores of online posts, I can appreciate the analogy.

Conventional wisdom holds that newspapers are losing readers to the Web, but I wonder if that's the case.

Talking with an articulate, college-educated medical technician at a doctor's office the other day, I learned that he reads the local newspaper only occasionally -- and then only about sports, in the free, online edition. Didn't he want to know if government -- any government -- was planning an action that might affect him?

He felt sure, he said, that if anything of moment was about to happen, he would hear about it.

He seemed not so much like a man who didn't want to know as one trying to avoid drowning in the information already being poured on him.

If that's what is happening, the solution for news organizations may lie in less, not more.

Voice of the people?

Others have made the point, but it is worth re-emphasizing that the phenomenon of people upset about the results of the recent election in Iran finding a way to get word of their plight to the rest of the world may not be wholly positive.

As the government of Iran has cracked down on the practice of journalism, disaffected Iranians have used their camera phones to photograph their demonstrations and sent out Twitter messages to spread the word where it otherwise might not be heard.

All this is being hailed as a watershed moment in the transition to an Internet-based worldwide information system. And it undeniably is noteworthy that people have found a way around an effort to stop the spread of vital information.

There are, however, some other things to consider.

First, there is little opportunity with tweets to verify their accuracy -- a standard element of mainstream journalism.

Second, if people on the street can affect worldwide perceptions by that method, what is to stop governments -- even bad governments -- from doing the same?

Food for thought.

Basketball and all else

As Orlando licks its wounds after its team lost the National Basketball Association championship series to the Los Angeles Lakers, that event continues to dominate the local news.

Nothing abroad, nothing in government -- federal, state or local -- gets anything but subordinate mention in the mainstream media in Central Florida. True, even competing for such a prize is far less common in Orlando than it is in Los Angeles, but it seems unlikely that the Lakers' win so dominates news in that community as the Magic's loss does in this.

Interesting how people are more interested in what entertains them than what could affect the way they live.

What won't we write?

New to blogging, I'm getting the impression that attracting readers/followers is regarded as a primary objective. That's consistent with other entities that distribute information and opinions.

Newspapers and magazines need advertising revenue, predicated on the size of their readership, to exist. Radio and television stations' advertising revenue is based on the number of listeners and viewers they attract.

In all but the smallest markets, though, the people selling advertising space or time are not the ones reporting the news or spouting opinion. In fact, at least in most print news organizations, journalists are specifically prohibited from participating in commercial activity -- beyond doing the best job they can to give their advertising salespeople something to sell.

Sort of like the way professional athletes don't sell tickets to the game.

As news organizations have migrated to the Web, though, journalism has moved ever closer to marketing as the desire to generate "hits" has closed in on the obligation to inform. As though all this exists in an echo chamber, newspapers are beginning to look more like their Websites -- giving emphasis to what attracts readers over information that readers might find vital.

Now, as journalism evolves into an individual rather than a team sport, it will be interesting to see how bloggers deal with the potential conflicts inherent in promoting -- even "monetizing" -- what they publish.

Time thief

Lately I've been playing with my recently acquired Generation 2 iPod Touch, a fascinating device that allows me -- when in Wi-Fi zones -- many of the advantages of a laptop computer. I can listen to lots of music, find stuff on the Web, make phone calls and read (and, theoretically, write) e-mail messages.

That last one made me a little uncomfortable, and I didn't know at first why. Then it occurred to me that it was not a lot different from the BlackBerry to which I had been addicted before I hung up my green eyeshade.

Anyone could get to me at any hour of the day or night -- and often did, as I would get up from a sound sleep to read it. When it and I parted company, I feared at first being disconnected. I quickly discovered, though, that I had been liberated. I started sleeping through the night. I checked my computer when I needed to or felt like it -- a lot less often than I had been checking the BlackBerry.

Now my iTouch has me doing it again. I carry it in my pocket and check it whenever I'm in a wired restaurant. I even check it around the house.

So now I'm going to be inviting social-media communication, and somehow I suspect that the time I gained by relinquishing the BlackBerry has been reclaimed by the iTouch.

One giant cyberleap

Welcome to what fills my mind as I vault from the printed page to the great unknown. Were it not for the online class I'm beginning, this transition might never have occurred -- or have occurred much later.

After years of spouting off with ink on paper about a variety of subjects -- most recently the craft of journalism -- we're moving to this new venue. With no small amount of trepidation.

I'm reminded of my early days as a cub reporter, finding that the writer's block that seized me as I approached my manual typewriter evaporated as my fingers touched the keys. When electric typewriters arrived, I feared that they would lack that magic. They didn't. Computers brought the same apprehension, but the chemistry made the transition, and words continued to flow.

Here we are in Paragraph 4 with no paper -- and, at least yet, no insight -- in sight. For now, I'm adjusting to the freefall and trusting that something worthwhile will follow.