Buy Iressa Without Prescription

Mark — Sun, 03 Apr 2011 21:56:16 +0000

As expected, this year's International Symposium on Online Journalism (my first) was an illuminating collision between the academic and practical sides of journalism — I'm sure most everyone left with a full set of ideas for newsroom initiatives, research projects, and the like. But if any of them are like me, they probably also find it difficult to properly process and mentally organize 40 presentations over the span of two days.

So here's my attempt at tying together a few of the ISOJ themes I saw, in the form of seven quotations that stood out.

1. "Twitter needs to be engaged as an online social network, not just another publication platform." - Marcus Messner, Virginia Commonwealth University

If there were two buzzwords that filled the conference's two days, they were "platform" and "engagement." I think both are ugly words that smack of marketing-speak (really, is there any buzzword that doesn't become ugly sooner or later?), but the latter in particular represents a crucial concept for news organizations operating online. Just about all news orgs recognize now that they simply have to engage with their users — or, more popularly, "the community" — in order to survive online, right?

Well, if they do recognize that, they certainly have an odd way of showing it. Both Messner and Texas State's Dale Blasingame did research analyzing news orgs' Twitter practices, finding that they use it predominantly to broadcast their stories, rather than (gasp!) conversing with people on a medium designed for conversing with people. The need to use interactive online tools to, well, interact seems like common knowledge by now, but among news orgs, it's apparently not.

2. "They need to be engaged in journalism, not uploading pet photos." - Jim Brady, Journal Register Co.

Ah, but there's the rub. All reader engagement, magical as it seems, is not equally useful. This idea runs counter to newsroom conventional wisdom, which seems to have adopted the "We'll take whatever we can get" philosophy, a mentality spoofed brilliantly in a BBC video showed by University of British Columbia professor Alfred Hermida.

So how do you create that more valuable engagement and connection with users? Brady's panel came up with some great insights, including the "call and response" model of success espoused by the Washington Post's Amanda Zamora and the idea from the New York Times' Jennifer Preston of organizing news websites around communities rather than print newspaper section. It's not enough to get someone's blurry pet photo or half-baked "reckon" (you really need to go back and click on that BBC video); we need interaction that means something.

3. "With millennials, they can sniff out shovelware pretty quick. They're pretty savvy." - Jake Batsell, Southern Methodist University

"Shovelware" was another commonly heard term throughout the conference, and it was sad to hear it used so often: It was used to define any content used on one medium that was originally designed to fit another. In the case of Batsell's study, that meant iPad apps that were a mere replication of the print or web experience (and with most publications, there wasn't that much difference between print and web in the first place). But it was also used to refer to uses of Twitter as a publication platform, or much of the government-directed online news coming out of Egypt in the research of Ahmed El Gody of Sweden's Orebro University.

4. "It has nothing to do with 30% [revenue cut]. It has nothing to do with 10%. It has to do with who owns the relationship with the consumer at the end of the day, and that's why we built ours internally." - Mark Medici, Dallas Morning News, on paywall systems

It's been opined before that the key factor in all this paid-content/subscription wrangling between Google, Apple, and publishers is not money, but customer data. And here it was, straight from the source: For the Morning News, the decision to build an internal paywall was not about retaining all the revenue; it was about collecting (almost frighteningly specific) individual-level data, which is far more valuable to advertisers than aggregate-level data.

Regardless of the soundness of the Morning News' paywall plan overall (I was skeptical, as were others), this is a welcome corrective for publishers. The next step, of course, is for them to actually care as much about their audience from a public-service perspective as they do from a moneymaking perspective. Because, as the BBC's Paul Brannan noted, news orgs are "still very much in the back woods" when it comes to understanding their users.

5. "This is hard, and it's not obvious to me that this model is replicable and sustainable all over the place ... but it's certainly worth trying." - John Thornton, Texas Tribune

Perhaps the best panel of the conference was the one on nonprofit journalism, featuring Thornton, the Bay Citizen's Lisa Frazier, and Gustavo Gorriti of Peru's IDL-Reporteros. For all the hype and "WILL THIS SAVE JOURNALISM?!?!?!?!?" hand-wringing nonprofit journalism has gotten, this panel — particularly Thornton and Gorriti — was pleasantly surprising in its realism.

That reality is, as the Thornton quote indicates, a nonprofit journalism that is best applied only in certain locations and contexts and is far from a magic bullet. But it doesn't have to be a magic bullet to be successful, and both the Tribune and Bay Citizen, so far, could be considered successes — at or above their major goals for both influence and fundraising. Despite the realism, there was a lot of reason for optimism regarding nonprofit journalism coming out of this panel.

6. "What we do as aggregators isn't about journalism. It's about making sense of the Internet." - an anonymous aggregator quoted by C.W. Anderson, CUNY-Staten Island

Aside from all the practically oriented material, there were plenty of intellectually stimulating ideas at ISOJ, led by the conference's top paper, a study of aggregation by Anderson. It spelled out a theme that several other panels hit on indirectly: All of these new online practices that news organizations are interacting with — whether it's aggregation or participatory news or open APIs — are forcing journalists to confront their own definition of journalism and realize that it's constricted, irrational, and inadequate.

Anderson's presentation provided the clearest picture of those shortcomings, noting that journalists' claim to democratic indispensability often falls back on an undefined concept of "original reporting" that doesn't even consider the modern technological environment. Aggregators, on the other hand, are rooted in the online world, swimming in a tidal wave of digital content and trying to make sense of it for their users. Now, which of those sounds more journalistic?

Buy Iressa Without Prescription

Mark — Mon, 10 Jan 2011 22:53:22 +0000

[This review was originally posted at the Nieman Journalism Lab on Jan. 7, 2011.] A net neutrality compromise: The Review might have taken two weeks off for the holidays, but the rest of the future-of-news world kept on humming. Consider this more your "Holidays in Review" than your "Week in Review." Let's get to it. The biggest news development of the past few weeks came just before Christmas, when the FCC passed a set of Internet regulations that were widely characterized as a compromise between net neutrality advocates and big Internet service providers. In essence, the rules will keep ISPs from blocking or slowing services on the traditional wired Internet, but leave the future of wireless regulation more unclear. (Here's a copy of the order and a helpful explainer from GigaOM.) In the political realm, the order drew predictable responses from both sides of the aisle: Conservatives (including at least one Republican FCC commissioner) were skeptical of a move toward net neutrality, while liberals (like Democratic Sen. Al Franken) fervently argued for it. In the media-tech world, it was greeted — as compromises usually are — with near-universal disdain. The Economist ran down the list of concerns for net neutrality proponents, led by the worry that the FCC "has handed the wireless carriers a free pass." This was especially troubling to j-prof Dan Kennedy, who argued that wireless networks will be far more important to the Internet's future than wired ones. Salon's Dan Gillmor said the FCC paid lip service to net neutrality, paving the way for a future more like cable TV than the open web we have now. Newsweek's Dan Lyons compressed his problems with the order into one statement: "There will soon be a fast Internet for the rich and a slow Internet for the poor." From the other side, Slate media critic Jack Shafer, a libertarian, questioned whether the FCC had the power to regulate the Internet at all, and imagined what the early Internet would have been like if the FCC had regulated it then. The Los Angeles Times' James Rainey told both sides to calm down, and at the Knight Digital Media Center, Amy Gahran used the story as an object lesson for news organizations in getting and linking to the source documents in question. — WikiLeaks and the media's awkward dance: The long tail of this fall's WikiLeaks story continues to run on, meandering into several different areas over the holidays. There are, of course, ongoing efforts to silence WikiLeaks, both corporate (Apple pulled the WikiLeaks app from its store) and governmental (a bill to punish circulation of similar classified information was introduced, and criticized by law prof Geoffrey Stone). In addition, Vanity Fair published a long piece examining the relationship between WikiLeaks' Julian Assange and The Guardian, the first newspaper to partner with him. Based on the story, Slate's Jack Shafer marveled at Assange's shrewdness and gamesmanship ("unequaled in the history of journalism"), Reuters' Felix Salmon questioned Assange's mental health, and The Atlantic's Nicholas Jackson wondered why The Guardian still seems to be playing by Assange's rules. We also saw the blowup of Salon columnist Glenn Greenwald's feud with Wired over some chat logs between alleged WikiLeaks leaker Bradley Manning and the man who turned him in. It's a complicated fight I'm not going to delve into here, but if you'd like to know more, here are two good blow-by-blows, one more partial to Wired, and another more sympathetic to Greenwald. Greenwald has also continued to be one of the people leading the inquiries into the traditional media's lack of support for WikiLeaks. Alternet rebutted several media misconceptions about WikiLeaks, and Newsweek attempted to explain why the American press is so lukewarm on WikiLeaks — they aren't into advocacy, and they don't like Assange's purpose or methods. One of the central questions to that media cold-shoulder might be whether Assange is considered a journalist, something GigaOM's Mathew Ingram tried to tackle. Other, more open critiques of WikiLeaks continue to trickle out, including ones from author Jaron Lanier and Floyd Abrams, a lawyer who argued for The New York Times in the Pentagon Papers case. Abrams' argument prompted rebuttals from Jack Shafer and NYU prof Clay Shirky. Shirky in particular offered a nuanced comparison of the Pentagon Papers-era Times and the globally oriented WikiLeaks, concluding that "the old rules will not produce the old outcomes." If you're still hungry for WikiLeaks analysis, John Bracken's rounded up the best of the year here. — Looking back, and looking forward: We rang in the new year last week, and that, of course, always means two things in the media world: year-end retrospectives, and previews of the year to come. The Lab wrapped up its own year in review/preview before Christmas with a review of Martin Langeveld's predictions for 2010. PBS' MediaShift also put together a good set of year-end reviews, including ones on self-publishing, the rapidly shifting magazine industry, a top-ten list of media stories (led by WikiLeaks, Facebook, and the iPad). You can also get a pretty good snapshot of the media year that was by taking a look at AOL's list of the top tech writing of 2010. Poynter's Rick Edmonds examined the year in newspaper stock prices (not great, but could've been worse), while media consultant Alan Mutter explained that investors tended to stay away from debt-laden newspaper companies in particular. As for the year to come, the Lab's readers weighed in — you like ProPublica, The Huffington Post, and Clay Shirky, and you're split on paywalls — and several others chimed in with their predictions, too. Among the more interesting prognostications: New York Times media critic David Carr sees tablets accelerating our ongoing media convergence, The Next Web forecasts a lot of blogs making the Gawker-esque beyond the blog format, Mashable's Vadim Lavrusik predicts the death of the foreign correspondent, TBD's Steve Buttry sees many journalism trade organizations merging, and the Lab's Martin Langeveld thinks we'll see John Paton's innovative measures at the Journal Register Co. slowly begin to be emulated elsewhere in the newspaper industry. Two other folks went outside the predictions mold for their 2011 previews: media analyst Ken Doctor looked at 11 pieces of conventional wisdom the media industry will test this year, and the University of Colorado's Steve Outing outlined his wishes for the new year. Specifically, he wants to see News Corp. and The New York Times' paid-content plans fail, and to see news execs try a value-added membership model instead. "This will require that news publishers actually work their butts off to sell, rather than sit back and expect people to fork over money "just because" everyone should support journalism," he wrote. — Rethinking publishing for the tablet: One theme for the new year in media that's already emerged is the impending dominance of the tablet. As The New York Times' Joshua Brustein wrote, that was supposed to be the theme last year, too, but only the iPad was the only device able to get off the ground in any meaningful way. Several of Apple's competitors are gearing up to make their push this year instead; The Times' Nick Bilton predicted that companies that try to one-up Apple with bells and whistles will fail, though Google may come up with a legitimate iPad rival. Google has begun work toward that end, looking for support from publishers to develop a newsstand to compete with Apple's app store. And Amazon's Kindle is doing fine despite the iPad's popularity, TechCrunch argued. Meanwhile, Women's Wear Daily reported that magazine app sales on the iPad are down from earlier in the year, though Mashable's Lauren Indvik argued that the numbers aren't as bad as they seem. The magazine numbers prompted quite a bit of analysis of what's gone wrong with magazine apps. British entrepreneur Andrew Walkingshaw ripped news organizations for a lack of innovation in their tablet editions — "tablets are always-on, tactile, completely reconfigurable, great-looking, permanently jacked into the Internet plumbing, and you’re using them to make skeumorphic newspaper clones?" — and French media consultant Frederic Filloux made similar points, urging publishers to come up with new design concepts and develop a coherent pricing structure (something Econsultancy's Patricio Robles had a problem with, too). There were plenty of other suggestions for tablet publications, too: GigaOM's Mathew Ingram said they should focus on filtering the web, MG Siegler of TechCrunch asked for an easy-to-use newsstand rather than a system of standalone apps, and Alan Mutter suggested magazines lower the prices and cut down on the technical glitches. Three others focused specifically on the tablet publishing business model: At the Lab, Ken Doctor gave us three big numbers to watch in determining where this is headed, entrepreneur Bradford Cross proposed a more ad-based model revolving around connections to the open web, and venture capitalist Fred Wilson predicted that the mobile economy will soon begin looking more like the web economy. — Reading roundup: A few items worth taking a look at over the weekend: — The flare-up du jour in the tech world is over RSS, and specifically, whether or not it is indeed still alive. Web designer Kroc Camen suggested it might be dying, TechCrunch's MG Siegler fingered Twitter and Facebook as the cause, Dave Winer (who helped develop RSS) took umbrage, and GigaOM's Mathew Ingram and The Guardian's Martin Belam defended RSS' relevance. — Add the Dallas Morning News to the list of paywalled (or soon-to-be-paywalled) papers to watch: It announced it will launch a paid-content plan Feb. 15. The Lab's Justin Ellis shed light on Morning News' thinking behind the plan. PaidContent's Staci Kramer alsobroke down a Pew report on paying for online content. — For the many writers are considering how to balance social media and longer-form writing, two thoughtful pieces to take a look at: Wired's Clive Thompson on the way tweets and texts can work in concert in-depth analysis, and Anil Dash on the importance of blogging good ideas. — Finally, NPR's Matt Thompson put together 10 fantastic lessons for the future of media, all coming from women who putting them into action. It's an encouraging, inspiring set of insights.

Buy Iressa Without Prescription

Mark — Mon, 10 Jan 2011 22:49:19 +0000

—[This review was originally posted at the Nieman Journalism Lab on Dec. 17, 2010.] The media and WikiLeaks' uneasy coexistence: The current iteration of the WikiLeaks story is about to move into its fourth week, and it continues to swallow up most future-of-journalism news in its path. By now, it's branched out into several distinct facets, and we'll briefly track down each of those, but here are the essentials this week: If you want the basics, Gawker has put together a wonderful explainer for you. If you want to dive deep into the minutiae, there's no better way than Dave Winer's wikiriver of relevant news feeds. Other good background info is this Swedish documentary on WikiLeaks, posted here in YouTube form. The big news development this week was WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange's release from British jail on bail Thursday. As blow-by-blow accounts of the legal situation go, you can't beat The Guardian's. Meanwhile, the U.S. government is trying to build a conspiracy case against Assange by connecting him more explicitly to Bradley Manning's leak, and Congress heard testimony on the subject Thursday. — The first WikiLeaks substory is the ongoing discussion about the actions of the legions of web-based "hacktivists," led by Anonymous, making counterattacks on WikiLeaks' behalf. Having gone after several sites last week (including one mistakenly), some activists began talking in terms of "cyber-war" — though GigaOM's Mathew Ingram cautioned against that type of language from all sides — and were urged on from jail by Assange. NYU professor Gabriella Coleman gave a glimpse into the inner workings of Anonymous, and they also drew plenty of criticism, too, from thinkers like British author Andrew Keen. Media consultant Deanna Zandt offered a thoughtful take on the ethics of cyber-activism. — The second facet here is the emergence of Openleaks, a leaking organization formally launched this week by WikiLeaks defector Daniel Domscheit-Berg as an alternative to Assange's group. As Domscheit-Berg explained to several outlets including Forbes, Openleaks will act as a more neutral conduit to leaks than WikiLeaks, which ended up publishing its leaks, something Openleaks won't do. Wired compared it with WikiLeaks' rejected 2009 Knight News Challenge proposal, in which it would have functioned primarily as an anonymous submission system for leaks to local news organizations. Openleaks won't be the last, either: As The Economist noted, if file-sharing is any guide, we'll see scores of rivals (or comrades). — The third story is the reaction of various branches of the traditional media, which have been decidedly mixed. WikiLeaks has gotten some support from several corners of the industry, including the faculty of the venerable Columbia School of Journalism, the press in Assange's native Australia, and Northeastern j-prof Dan Kennedy and numerous other British and American professors and journalists, both in The Guardian. But it's also been tweaked by others — New York Times editor Bill Keller said that if Assange is a journalist, "he's not the kind of journalist that I am." Salon columnist Glenn Greenwald ripped what he called the mainstream media's "servile role" to the government in parroting its attitudes toward WikiLeaks, then later argued that the government's prosecution of WikiLeaks would be a prosecution of investigative journalism in general. Likewise, Morris' Steve Yelvington listed five reasons the media hasn't shown outrage about the government's backlash against WikiLeaks, including the point that the segment of the American mainstream media concerned about national issues is a shell of its former self. — All of this provided plenty of fodder for a couple of conferences on WikiLeaks, Internet freedom, and secrecy. Last weekend, the Personal Democracy Forum held a symposium on the subject — you can watch a replay here, as well as a good summary by GRITtv and additional videos on the state of the Internet and online civil disobedience. Micah Sifry offered a thoughtful take on the event afterwards, saying that longings for a "more responsible" version of WikiLeaks might be naive: It's "far more likely that something far more disruptive to the current order--a distributed and unstoppable system for spreading information--is what is coming next," he wrote. And on Thursday, the Lab held its own one-day conference on journalism and secrecy that included keynotes by the AP's Kathleen Carroll and The Times' Bill Keller (who distanced himself from Assange but defended The Times' decision to publish). If you want to go deeper into the conversation at the conference, the #Niemanleaks hashtag on Twitter is a good place to start. — Will the iPad eat into print?: The iPad news this week starts with the University of Missouri's Reynolds Journalism Institute, which released a study that suggests, based on survey data, that iPad news apps may cut into newspaper subscriptions by next year. There's a ton of other interesting data on how iPads are being used and how users are comparing them to print newspapers and newspaper websites, but one statistic — 58% of those who subscribe to a print newspaper and use their iPad for more than an hour a day planned to cancel their print subscription within six months — was what drew the headlines. Alan Mutter said publishers have to like the demographics of the iPad's prime users, but have to wonder whether developing print-like iPad apps is worth it. Several news organizations introduced new iPad apps this week, led by CNN. Poynter's Damon Kiesow talked to CNN about the rationale behind its photo-oriented multitouch design, and MocoNews' Ingrid Lunden looked at why CNN might have made their app free. Steve Safran of Lost Remote liked the app's design and sociability. Also, the New York Daily News launched a paid (though cheaper than the New York Post) app, and Harper's added its own as well. Meanwhile, Flipboard, the inaugural iPad app of the year, launched a new version this week. Forbes' Quentin Hardy talked to Flipboard's CEO about the vision behind the new app, and The Wall Street Journal wrote about innovative iPad news apps in general. The Washington Post's Justin Ferrell talked to the Lab's Justin Ellis about how to design news apps for the iPad. In iPad advertising, Apple launched its first iAd, which seems to be essentially a fully formed advertisement app. One iPad app that's not coming out this week: Rupert Murdoch's "tablet newspaper" The Daily, whose launch has reportedly been postponed until next year. — Looking ahead to 2011: We're nearing the end of the December, which means we're about to see the year-end reviews and previews start to roll in. The Lab got them kicked off this week by asking its readers for predictions of what 2011 will bring in the journalism world, then publishing the predictions of some of the smartest future-of-news folks in the room. All of the posts are worth checking out, but there are a few I want to note in particular — The AP's Jonathan Stray on moving beyond content tribalism ("a news product that refuses to provide me with high-quality filtering and curation of the rest of the world’s information will only ever be an endpoint"), NPR's Matt Thompson on instant speech transcription ("the Speakularity"), tech pioneer Dave Winer on adjusting to the new news distribution system ("That’s the question news people never seem to ask. How can we create something that has a market?"), and a couple of paid-content predictions on The New York Times and by Steven Brill (who has skin in the game). The prediction post that generated the most discussion was NYU professor Clay Shirky's piece on the dismantling of the old-media syndication system. GigaOM's Mathew Ingram expanded on the idea, connecting it explicitly to Google News and the Associated Press, and asking, "In a world where the power to syndicate is available to all, does anyone want what AP is selling?" USC's Pekka Pekkala explained why he sees this as a positive development for journalists and niche content producers. As if on cue, Thomson Reuters announced the launch of its new American news service, one that seems as though it might combine traditional news syndication with some elements of modern aggregation. Media analyst Ken Doctor gave some more details about the new service and its deal with the Tribune Co., and Gawker's Hamilton Nolan was skeptical of this potential new direction for newswires. — Reading roundup: A few good pieces before I send you on your way: — First, one quick bit of news: The social bookmarking service Delicious will reportedly be shut down by Yahoo. Here's a short ode from ReadWriteWeb and a list of alternatives from The Next Web. — At the London Review of Books, British journalist John Lanchester has written an essay making a case for why and how the newspaper industry needs to charge for news online. Anti-paywall folks aren't going to be crazy about it, but it's far from the stereotypical revanchist "Make 'em pay, just 'cause they should" pro-pay argument: "Make the process as easy as possible. Make it invisible and transparent. Make us register once and once only. Walls are not the way forward, but walls are not the same thing as payment, and without some form of payment, the press will not be here in five years’ time." — A couple of close looks at what news organizations are doing right: The Atlantic's web transformation and tips on multimedia storytelling from NPR's acclaimed Planet Money. — A North Carolina j-prof and Duke grad student came together(!) to urge news organizations to incorporate more of the tenets of citizen journalism. They have a few specific, practical suggestions, too. — British journalist Adam Westbrook gave his goodbye to mainstream media, making a smart case that the future lies outside its gates. — Finally, Jonathan Stray, an AP editor and Lab contributor, has a brilliant essay challenging journalists and news organizations to develop a richer, more fully formed idea of what journalism is for. It may be a convicting piece, but it offers an encouraging vision for the future — and the opportunity for reform — too.

Buy Iressa Without Prescription

Mark — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 17:40:59 +0000

Buy Iressa Without Prescription, I hope you've recovered well from all your holiday and year-end festivities (here in Nebraska, we're just now starting to shovel out). Iressa in usa, Meanwhile, the flood of new media ideas continued (almost) unabated, delivered overnight Iressa, Where can i order Iressa without prescription, so we've got quite a bit of catching up to do. I'll try to have you in and out of here in a hurry, order Iressa from United States pharmacy. Free Iressa samples, As always, if you want to know what this is about, buy Iressa from mexico, Where can i buy Iressa online, an explanation is here.)

— It's not often we see veteran media critics go ga-ga over new technology, so when at least three of them gushed about the landscape-altering potential of the tablet this week, Iressa paypal, Buy Iressa without prescription, it's probably best that we sit up and take notice. First, buy no prescription Iressa online, Iressa to buy online, we had New York Times media critic David Carr getting giddy over the unreleased Apple iSlate, saying it "represents an opportunity to renew the romance between printed material and consumer." (Elsewhere in the Times, purchase Iressa, Iressa in japan, Alice Rawsthorn says that the iSlate could explode the e-reader market, just like the iPod did for MP3 players.)

Then, where can i find Iressa online, Where can i buy cheapest Iressa online, longtime-journalist-turned-consultant Mark Potts said the iSlate "has the potential to strikingly transform large swaths of the media business, from newspapers to television to movies, fast shipping Iressa, Buy cheap Iressa, pretty much all at once." Finally, the biggest surprise: News-business guru Alan Mutter, buy Iressa from canada, Sale Iressa, possibly the most sober critic out there, declared that tablets "will the rock media as much, buy generic Iressa, Buy Iressa online with no prescription, if not more, than the Internet."

Wow, over the counter Iressa. That's a lot of praise being poured on a product that no one has seen yet, Buy Iressa Without Prescription. Order Iressa online c.o.d, (Not everyone's on the tablet bandwagon, though, Iressa trusted pharmacy reviews. Iressa buy, Slate's consummate contrarian, Jack Shafer, Iressa prices, Purchase Iressa online, decried the tablet hype just before Christmas.) The always-sensible Ken Doctor weighed in with nine good questions about the iSlate and tablets. And by the way, order Iressa from mexican pharmacy, Iressa from canadian pharmacy, Hearst also introduced its own e-reader this week: The Skiff. (Slate's The Big Money looks at the details.)

I think the hype's at least a bit overblown, Iressa in australia. Buy Iressa Without Prescription, It seems absurd to me to suggest that just about anything, let alone a new version of existing type of product, will change media as much or more than the Internet did. Some of the bolder statements about the iSlate may end up being embarrassing a few years down the road, the product more of wishful thinking than level-headed prescience. Iressa overseas, But I don't necessarily want to debunk the hype, either: To me, buy Iressa online without prescription, Buy Iressa online no prescription, it seems more helpful to think of all of these media sea changes as something the tablet could do, not something it will do, Iressa over the counter. Next day Iressa, I read Mark Potts' medium-by-medium list of the effects of iSlate as a sort of call to action for people in those media to do some serious thinking, planning and developing to be on the front end of that revolution if it comes, buy Iressa no prescription. Buy Iressa without a prescription, This could be traditional media's second chance to be more proactive in finding ways to (gasp!) use technology to its advantage, after its first chance with the Internet was largely squandered.

— NYU's Jay Rosen has long railed against the Sunday morning talk show format on Twitter, buy cheap Iressa no rx, Online buying Iressa hcl, but a couple of weeks ago, he took the opportunity to lay out his case and offer a fix, online buy Iressa without a prescription. Iressa to buy, His case, in a nutshell: Sunday talk shows bring on a hyper-partisan rep from both sides then faux-interrogate them, Iressa gel, ointment, cream, pill, spray, continuous-release, extended-release, Cod online Iressa, so the public is no closer to the truth and is left throwing up their hands in cynicism. His solution: Fact-check the guests' statements and post a midweek review online, as well as making it a segment on next week's show, Buy Iressa Without Prescription.

Both The Huffington Post and Media Matters called Rosen's solution "modest." Instead, purchase Iressa online no prescription, Saturday delivery Iressa, the HuffPo's Jason Linkins advocated a real-time fact-check that would at the end of each show (ESPN's Pardon the Interruption does a light-hearted version of this), and Media Matters' Jamison Foser called on hosts to fact-check guests' talking points ahead of time, rx free Iressa, Iressa prescriptions, then jump them if they tried using any of those points. The political blog Crooks and Liars has a few other ideas, Iressa from international pharmacy, Iressa discount, including a "three strikes and you're out" rule.

My response: Yes, buying Iressa online over the counter, Iressa in us, please — to just about all of the above. And let's apply it to 24-hour cable news while we're at it, buy Iressa online without a prescription. As Jon Stewart has so deftly pointed out Buy Iressa Without Prescription, , there are way, way too many patently absurd statements going unchallenged because hosts either don't have the resources or the cojones to take them on. But lest we get too optimistic about things, one of Linkins' readers, a veteran broadcaster, interrupts us with the reality of the TV news biz: "Such a program will have no commercially viable audience to sell and, if through some miracle it got on-the-air, it would soon be canceled for lack of revenue." Call me an idealist, but I'm still hopeful that someone will try it anyway. Iressa in mexico, — Several interesting Twitter pieces the last couple of weeks: Anil Dash, a top Web entrepreneur and thinker who's now working within the Obama administration, real brand Iressa online, Iressa in uk, chronicled life on Twitter's Suggested Users List, a magical ticket to hundreds of thousands of followers that's both coveted and reviled, Iressa tablets. Iressa price, coupon, Dash's counterintuitive conclusion: "Being on Twitter's suggested user list makes no appreciable difference in the amount of retweets, replies, order Iressa online overnight delivery no prescription, Order Iressa no prescription, or clicks that I get." He later declared that no one on Twitter has a million legitimate followers.

Two other Web/media luminaries offered sterling defenses of Twitter: New York Times media critic David Carr opined on why Twitter will endure and writer and net-neutrality activist Cory Doctorow took down common criticisms of Twitter, Iressa craiglist, Iressa san diego, MySpace and Facebook. Good stuff to beat your anti-social media friends over the head with, Iressa pills.

— We're now nine days into the new decade, but I've still got plenty of year-end/2010 preview leftovers for you, Buy Iressa Without Prescription. Iressa for sale, Actually, only one year-end review left — Ken Fang has a very detailed review of 2009 in sports media, where to buy Iressa. Iressa in canada, As for 2010, Jason Fry has already tied several of the forward-looking pieces together in a good post, so check him out first. Here's a quick summary:

Several folks take their shots at predicting the next year in media. Rachel Sklar of the Daily Beast says we'll see bylines become brands and niche media explode; The Economist calls 2010 "the year of the paywall"; Poynter's Rick Edmonds says we won't find meaningful online ad revenue this year; Alan Mutter gives a very "maybe, maybe not" preview of 2010; and the Boston Phoenix hits all of the basic hot-button issues. Buy Iressa Without Prescription, Others got much more practical, with some useful resolutions. Judy Sims has resolutions for news executives; and Gina Chen, Adam Westbrook, John Thompson and Adam Sullivan all have some tips for journalists to improve and adapt in the new year.

— We'll probably be reading much more about this in the next week, but I wanted to get the front end of this news in the review yet this week: Rupert Murdoch looks like he's officially beginning to act on all those fightin' words about aggregation and paid content. He blocked UK aggregator NewsNow from his Times Online site. Meanwhile, Google News, his main target, has stopped hosting new content from Associated Press, one of Murdoch's allies in his fight against aggregators. (Danny Sullivan has thoughts on both developments.) These are relatively small moves, but I believe they mean this fight is officially on.

— Writing for The Atlantic, Slate founder Michael Kinsley urged newspaper journalists to write shorter, pointing out numerous examples of unnecessarily verbose language in The New York Times, Buy Iressa Without Prescription. He got a lot of pushback: The Columbia Journalism Review's Greg Marx and Megan Garber defended long stories (Garber's critique is a little more thorough and thoughtful), and political blogger Spencer Ackerman proposed modular journalism — covering one topic per story, and linking to the rest — as a solution.

I think Reuters' Robert MacMillan hits on it the best, though: What Kinsley really has a problem with is not length, but bad writing that's overblown and doesn't get to the point. That's the root cause; long stories are only a symptom, and kind of a red herring at that.

— I've gone way long, so I'll make these last few links quick. In order of awesome-ness: 1) The Online Journalism Review's Robert Niles has a wonderful post on journalism as community organizing (You don't just show up online and get read, he says); 2) longtime Editor & Publisher columnist Steve Outing writes his last piece, an alternative history of newspapers and a look to the future; and 3) ReadWriteWeb has a great primer on the real-time Web. Enjoy.