I just tried to start a topic on Guardian witness but not sure where it went. I don't seem to have a record of what I wrote.
i am trying to test it out and there is a lot of background, maybe a good chance to restate some of the archive. The Witness project may turn out to be a useful development but I find the print version continues as mostly negative about the Web. Previously I mentioned the attack on Jeff Jarvis in the Saturday Review
Now I notice he is a speaker at an Activate conference in a couple of months. I wonder if the tone will change.
I think this is coming from Everything Everywhere, sponsors of the App. Previously the Guardian scrapped Guardian Unlimited Talk so a mass of content was wrecked. No notice, no chance to back anything up. I will need some reassurance that nothing similar will happen again. Also some explanation would still be helpful. Why did it happen and who knew about it?
There is an interview with Joanna Geary on a blog from Adam Tinworth
Jo is clear that she and the team are aware of previous failures in this space - that's why they've so consciously steered away from tainted terms like "user-generated content" and "citizen journalism".
Well, why is "citizen journalism" tainted? I used to contribute to OhmyNews and I found their case very convincing. As far as I know it continues in Korea. The problem was that OhmyNews was only reported in the Technology section on a Thursday. All we got on a Monday was some not very funny fantasy, supposed to appeal to proper print journalists I imagine.
Follow this link for what I find is not unusual on the printed Guardian pages. Will Jeff Jarvis ever again get a similar amount of space?
My guess is that The Media and Education print pages will have very little about web disruption, certainly not much positive, unless there is a special section with a sponsor.
EE may find other ways to get these ideas across. The UK is soon heading where Korea was a while ago.