iPad Developing Ideas

The iPad is earning the label of "idea creator."

Much fuss has been created since the release of Apple's newest creation but most of that has been technical news. Chuck Frey is arguing in his blog that the iPad is going to be the best way to create and develop ideas, as well as share those ideas.

Frey points the portability and battery life of the iPad as a major pro for the spread and share of ideas. The iPad can be taken anywhere and especially if you purchase the 3G version it can be used to find information for that story you have been trying to write.

The bigger screen and new technology in the iPad allows you to browse mediums of news not only quicker but more efficiently to find the information that is important. It is a tool meant to tap all forms of media and because of this owners of the iPad have a world of information at their fingertips.

The iPad is also helping the ideas it creates be implemented. The iPad allows you to download full books and allows authors to publish books and blogs that may not have been published otherwise. Frey feels the iPad will never take the place of a computer or a laptop, but its versatility and ability to tap information that those two also can makes it a prime source for developing and implementing your ideas.

Read more...

Generation Touchscreen

Once dubbed "Generation Z" or "digital natives," the new hipper term for those under the age of 15 is "Generation I." Analysts at Gartner have predicted that over 50% of the computers purchased for this age group will have touchscreens by 2015. That means the idea of typing on a keyboard will be gone.

Gone will be bedtime stories from a book chosen off a bookshelf or even drawing on paper with crayons. Board games and shuffling a deck of cards - will this generation even learn to do this? Tangible objects with a feeling of permanence will be replaced by an application on a computer.

The computer that used to be a tool, a means to an end, is now everything. It is 160,000 applications with more added daily. It replaces books, TV's, DVD players, coloring books, a canvas, a globe, and so much more. Also predicted is that over half of U.S. schools will specify touch and/or pen input within the next 5 year - and this seems to be accurate prediction.

As we adjust to smaller and smaller hand-held devices, smaller keyboards and keys, and now touchscreens - the logical next step will be voice activation.

Read more...

Paid Tweets in Twitter Searches

Twitter recently announced that is is testing the concept of advertising through "Promoted Tweets." This comes after pressure to turn its wide usage into profits since growing rapidly from 2006.

The Promoted Tweets will appear as ads on top of search results, so users would see the new ads when they search broadly for topics being tweeted about.

Twitter invited a test group of advertisers, including Virgin America, Best Buy Co, Sony Pictures, and Starbucks Corp. The ads are not expected to bring in much money during this initial phase, but it should eventually turn into a paid model.

About 69 million people worldwide used Twitter in March, up from roughly 4 million at the end of 2008. Investors have valued the site at $1billion. Twitter is making an undisclosed amount of money by providing Google Inc. and Microsoft Corp. with access to messages for their search engines.

The catch? If a Promoted Tweet isn't replied to or forwarded by other users, it will disappear. With advertising bombarding our emails and virtually every website visited, I don't know how logical it would be to expect viewers to forward ads. It will be interesting to see if the concept is successful.

Read more...

Who Do We Hold to What Standard

People are very passionate in their opinions about whether or not The Daily Show with Jon Stewart is "news." Most explain this opinion is because the show doesn't present equal sides of the issues as journalism should. The problem I have, is that the media itself has labeled show as "news", which is something that Stewart never claimed the show to be. Per the show's website, it is intended to be a nightly half-hour series "unburdened by objectivity, journalistic integrity or even accuracy". With that in mind, should the public hold Jon Stewart, who has no degree in journalism, political science, or communications, to the same standard as we hold other commentators who hold those titles and assume that responsibility?

Bernard Goldberg believes so. On April 15th, Stewart aired a clip of Goldberg and several other commentators from Fox News complaining about the media generalizing the Tea Party based on the actions of a few individuals. Stewart agreed that the media had done so, but then pointed out that Fox News in particular was guilty of the same generalizations against liberals. He proved his point by airing several clips of Goldberg along with Bill O'Reilly and others making generalized statements that portrayed liberals in a negative light. Goldberg responded to this by appearing on O'Reilly's Fox News program and agreeing that Stewart had a point, but he went on to say that Stewart himself had failed as a news reporter and social commentator because he did not treat liberal guests as roughly as conservative ones.

"But if clearly you want to be a social commentator, more than just a comedian and if you want to be a good one, you better find some guts because even though you criticize liberals as well as conservatives, congratulations on that, when you had Frank Rich on your show, who generalizes all the time about conservatives and Republicans being bigots, you didn’t ask him a single tough question. You gave him a lap dance. You practically had your tongue down his throat.."

Stewart addressed the critisism on his show April 20th. He pulled together the entire clip of Goldberg and his comments, pausing inbetween to offer challenge points and elaborate a few of his own points.

There was one in particular where Goldberg claims that Stewart isn't as edgy as he thinks he is. "You're just a safe Jay Leno, with smaller audience, but you get to say the F-bomb, which gives your incredibly unsophisticated audience the illusion that you're courageous and you're renegade, but it's only an illusion."

Stewart responded with mock horror, exclaiming "Wait, Wait... I'm not a courageous renegade? But I've always considered myself the Lorenzo Lamas of late night." Stewart continued, explaining that he never labeled his show as edgy, or claimed to be renegade. He accused Goldberg of trying to hold his show to the standard proclaimed by the Fox News tagline "always fair and balanced." "You can’t criticize me for not being ‘fair and balanced.’ That’s your slogan. Which by the way, you never follow..."

Stewart ended the segment with a gospel style skit in which explained that, even in his personal beliefs, he is not perpetually on one side or the other. He closed by calling Fox News the "lupus of news" and offered the same insult he had given to them in the clip on April 15th. "Fox News, as long as fair and balanced is how you sell yourselves, Go F*** yourself," to which the audicence clapped and cheered and the choir behind Stewart broke out into a gospel style chorus of the insult.

The whole clip was amusing to me on many levels from both sides, but what struck me was how Stewart is constantly being portrayed as a journalist, which he is not. Fox News has been critisized by not only Stewart, but other sources (News Hounds and FAIR for example) for being biased in its commentary. Fox News responds not by changing the way it portrays news, but by hurling back superfulous accusations against the accusers, and calling them what appears to be their favorite insult: liberals.

For consumers of media, what does this approach provide to us? From either side, whether you choose to watch Stewart and his openly comedic biased social commentary, Fox News with its right-wing tilt to everything, or another source, if the journalism being provided by our largest news corporations isn't accurately giving us the facts, how can we make informed decisions on all the issues that affect us?

For me, when I watch Stewart, I am fully aware that I'm getting his opinion with the jokes. I completely understand that he might be a little biased, and he can be, because he's never claimed to be a journalist and I don't hold him to those standards. But Goldberg and others are journalists, and there is no warning on Fox News that states "the opinions expressed on this channel may not portray all accurate portions of the story." Which, in my opinion, means Fox News is selling me a false product.

Read more...