• Lab
  • AndroidForMobile Foundation at
    HOME
              
    LATEST STORY
    Newsonomics: The Washington Post’s ambitions for Arc have grown — to a Bezosian scale
    ABOUT                    SUBSCRIBE
    Aug. 31, 2012, 10:48 a.m.

    This Week in Review: Apple’s win and mobile’s future, and fresh ways to cover the conventions

    Plus: President Obama’s stop at Reddit, questions about bias and boundaries at The New York Times, and the rest of the week’s media and tech news.

    Apple’s big patent win: A U.S. grand jury returned a patent verdict in Apple’s favor last Friday that could have significant implications for mobile media production and consumption. The jury ordered Samsung to pay Apple more than $1 billion for violating Apple’s patents for smartphone design, a ruling that could cause several phone makers to tweak or scrap their smartphone designs, which, as The New York Times , are largely based on Apple’s concepts.

    Apple followed the ruling up by , including several of its signature Galaxy line, from the country. Its CEO, Tim Cook, a win for innovators, while Samsung for consumers and that they’re the ones innovating, while Apple is trying to maintain its market dominance through litigation.

    As for the big picture of what this ruling means, The Atlantic’s Alexis Madrigal’s of a variety of perspectives is the place to start. The Guardian’s Dan Gillmor by what the ruling will do to competition in the smartphone market, giving over more of the industry over to Apple’s draconian policies: “Even more than Microsoft during that company’s most ruthless days in the 1990s, Apple wants control over how we use technology.” And Forbes’ and GigaOM’s both lamented the ruthlessness with which patents are being applied to technology design, stifling innovation across the field.

    On the other hand, , this decision could be the “kick in the pants” that cellphone manufacturers need to create more innovative design, rather than just modeling after Apple. For consumers, this could mean fewer phones and a slower turnaround time between models, as the San Jose Mercury News .

    The two third parties most affected by the decision seem to be Microsoft and Google. The conventional wisdom, as and explained, is that manufacturers who have been making phones on Google’s Android platform (the primary competitor to Apple’s iOS) will flee to Microsoft’s fledgling Windows Phone, which is free from Apple patent conflict — though Hachman pointed out that Windows Phone still has to attract a critical mass of users, too.

    As for Google, Kara Swisher of All Things D said they have to be right now, while Charles Arthur of The Guardian that the Samsung case is something of a proxy war between Apple and Google. Arthur contended that Android will still have the upper hand overseas, but Google can only hope for a quick, clean settlement with Apple to salvage its U.S. share. Brian Proffitt of ReadWriteWeb, on the other hand, said this decision for Google if it entices phone developers to stick closer to the Android platform.

    How should the conventions be covered?: The Republican National Convention may not have even been the biggest U.S. story of the week (that’d be Hurricane Isaac), but it generated a great deal of discussion about the role of the political press in an increasingly hostile political climate. About were expected to descend on Tampa to cover the event, at the same time that many political observers were wondering whether party conventions are .

    That sentiment extended, of course, to the media’s coverage of the conventions. The Huffington Post’s Howard Fineman said the conventions are an example of (the traditional news media) tripping all over itself to cover another one, and CUNY’s Jeff Jarvis called the convention saturation coverage a that only serves editorial ego, rather than readers. The New York Times’ David Carr and said that since the conventions are just a tightly scripted, faux-reality event, journalists might want to take cues from reality TV producers about how to approach them.

    But Reuters’ Jack Shafer said in the form of glimpses at future presidential candidates and connections with grassroots-level party organizers, and Northeastern University’s Dan Kennedy to keep their coverage fresh by getting out of the convention hall and looking for stories.

    CNN faced a particular conundrum in its convention coverage when two attendees at a black CNN camerawoman (they were subsequently kicked out of the convention). The Washington Post’s Erik Wemple said CNN should of covering the story in detail, while Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo said CNN’s commitment to appearing neutral in this instance.

    The conventions also continued to spur the ongoing discussion on fact-checking and the proper approach to political falsehoods. The Romney campaign by saying it wouldn’t let itself “be dictated by fact-checkers.” Several convention speeches, especially vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan’s, contained glaring inaccuracies, which were rather uncharacteristically by mainstream media outlets. The Atlantic’s and Poynter’s  wondered if we’re starting to see journalists adjust to a post-truth political world, and NYU’s Jay Rosen that this does seem to be a real shift for the political press.

    Still, The New Republic’s Alec MacGillis found that many at the convention and suggested those issues are seen as simply the domain of the old-school media. The Columbia Journalism Review’s Brendan Nyhan urged news orgs to in their anti-falsehood efforts, and Mathew Ingram of GigaOM said they need to do this . Media consultant Dan Conover said if it’s done from the viewlessness of journalistic objectivity. “Just as surveyors must establish a reference point before they begin measuring property lines, so too must journalists find and announce a meaningful perspective before they attempt to measure truth,” he said.

    Reddit as political forum: President Barack Obama made a surprise appearance on an on the social-news site Reddit, submitted by Reddit users and in the process. Poynter’s Andrew Beaujon and initial reactions well.

    Some observers saw it as a symbolically important moment in Internet politics. All Things D’s Eric Johnson said the Reddit appearance regardless of what he said (or didn’t say) because the web has become that political town hall it was predicted to be in the ’90s. O’Reilly Media’s Alex Howard said it for allowing citizens to interact with powerful figures with the support of digital communities, and GigaOM’s Mathew Ingram to presidential press conferences.

    On the other side, The Atlantic’s Alexis Madrigal said Reddit just on the same packaged elision we’re used to seeing from politicians: “In the 10 answers Obama gave, there was not a single one that’d be interesting to Redditors if it had appeared somewhere else,” he wrote, concluding, “Tech is not the answer to the problems of modern politics.” Slate identified Obama left unanswered, and The Verge’s Adrianne Jeffries pointed out that Reddit is for Obama. Meanwhile, Jeff Sonderman of Poynter provided journalists with a .

    Bias and boundaries at the Times: Buffalo News editor Margaret Sullivan is for The New York Times, but outgoing public editor Arthur Brisbane made one last round of headlines with his , in which he urged the Times to be more transparent and dinged the paper for its “political and cultural progressivism” which bleeds through on certain topics. Jay Rosen in Brisbane’s observation — that he didn’t acknowledge that former public editor Daniel Okrent has famously , and that he also called for greater transparency, which Rosen said seemed at odds with the criticism for bias.

    Erik Wemple of the Washington Post that Occupy Wall Street was one of those issues that the Times treated as a cause. Times executive editor Jill Abramson to Brisbane’s statement, and Andrew Beaujon of Poynter , often overlooked in the bias wars, that the Times “does metric tons of reporting every day.”

    Brisbane had one last snafu to weigh in on when reported (via ) that a Times reporter forwarded an advance copy of a Maureen Dowd column to a CIA spokeswoman. Brisbane as a breach of reporter-source and news-editorial boundaries, but others saw something deeper and more ominous at work: At The Guardian, Glenn Greenwald called it a between the Times and the CIA, and Dan Gillmor that the Times’ true bias is in favor of the powerful.

    Ethics in a citizen-driven media world: Two people were killed in a shooting on a sidewalk near the Empire State Building last Friday, a very public location that left news orgs with difficult decisions about whether to run graphic images of the shooting. Poynter’s Jeff Sonderman of numerous news sites’ visual presentation of the story, and Mashable’s Lance Ulanoff why he chose not to run a graphic photo.

    Most of the questions about how news orgs handled the incident centered on The New York Times, which ran a particularly arresting image of the shooting victim. A Times spokesperson the Times found the picture newsworthy particularly because it “shows the result and impact of a public act of violence,” and Poynter’s and both approved of the image based on a similar rationale.

    Bonnie Bernstein of On the Media who took the photo, who wasn’t a professional. Jeff Jarvis said graphic material like this as we shift toward news content that’s provided by non-professionals. “I think we’ve become much too accustomed to mediated news, to a world sanitized for our protection,” he wrote.

    Reading roundup: This week was a bit less busy than the last two, but there was still plenty to check out below the radar:

    — A few Twitter notes: Twitter went a bit further in prioritizing its own user experience by from which tweets came from the tweets themselves. GigaOM’s and tech blogger both explored Twitter’s increasingly complex relationship with media organizations. Meanwhile, Twitter on behalf of an Occupy protester whose tweets were requested by the state of New York.

    — Several months after announcing it would drop to non-daily delivery at its newspapers in New Orleans and Alabama, Newhouse at its papers in Syracuse, N.Y., and Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. Poynter and the two papers’ . The American Journalism Review’s Lindsay Kalter how print cutbacks have gone at Newhouse’s paper in Ann Arbor, Michigan.

    — After quite a bit of speculation, The New York Times Co. to Barry Diller’s IAC, which also owns Newsweek and The Daily Beast. Business Insider what kind of a drain About had been to the Times.

    — Finally, three useful pieces on Twitter for journalists: Digital First’s Steve Buttry for Twitter’s usefulness to journalists (for the Twitter-phobe in your life), Amy Gahran of the Knight Digital Media Center gave some advice on , and Poynter’s Mallary Tenore some of Twitter’s lessons for writing well in tight spaces.

    Photo of Apple and Samsung connectors by and Republican National Convention by used under a Creative Commons license.

    POSTED     Aug. 31, 2012, 10:48 a.m.
    SHARE THIS STORY
       
     
    Join the 45,000 who get the freshest future-of-journalism news in our daily email.
    Newsonomics: The Washington Post’s ambitions for Arc have grown — to a Bezosian scale
    It is increasingly the tech stack of choice for major news publishers. But now Arc wants to be the backbone of your digital advertising and subscriptions, too.
    Nope, there isn’t a podcast bubble
    Plus: Serial’s audience grows, Gannett builds a local audio franchise, and what a Pandora–SiriusXM marriage could mean for podcasting.
    Watch out, algorithms: Julia Angwin and Jeff Larson unveil The Markup, their plan for investigating tech’s societal impacts
    “Journalists in every field need to have more skills to investigate those types of decision-making that are embedded in technology.”
    855.avtomaticheskij-poliv.kiev.ua

    www.profvest.com/2018/04/diamond-found-hyip-otzivi-obzor.html

    У нашей фирмы полезный портал , он описывает в статьях про литье по выплавляемым моделям https://www.yujin.com.ua/molding/