1. Give your users prominent space to substantively interact, express themselves, and participate in the genesis and dissemination of news. Include people in your reporting projects, and facilitate connections between those who would like to collaborate among themselves.
2. Comb the web for people experimenting with news—building databases or analytical tools, writing programs that might have some news application, pursuing one-off projects designed to last for the lifespan of the event they were was created to analyze and record. Promote these efforts. Critique them with an eye toward improving them. Integrate them into your own site and encourage the experimenters to use your site to disseminate their work.
3. Devote sections of your site to training users in news and computer literacy, which is key if we are to grow a generation of responsible digital citizens. Make yourself into a place where people can go to learn how to read and evaluate a news story; offer tutorials on computer programming. Give engaged citizens the tools to become articulate participants in any given discussion.
4. Encourage and cultivate productive dissent. Make it easy for people to explain what you’re doing wrong and how it could be done better; consider and respond to these critiques. Illuminate your internal workings in a way that a hundred-billion-dollar company would never illuminate its own.
At base, at their best, news organizations have always wanted to responsibly inform and thereby empower individuals to become assets to their communities. By turning their websites into hubs for collaboration, experimentation, education, and dissent, news organizations can extend their pursuit of that goal and advance a true vision for the future of social news.
At the f8 conference this September, Mark Zuckerberg called the changes that he introduced “an important next step to help tell the story of your life.” Helping people tell stories is a laudable goal, certainly, but what does it actually mean?
News organizations, for all their flaws, have always held high the notion of the story as a useful, powerful, sacred thing. Stories told thoughtfully and disseminated widely can and have changed the world. Mark Zuckerberg also wants to change the world—and the evidence indicates that he wants to change it into a blander, more homogeneous place, where people express themselves within limits and are reduced to their affinities and preferences; where stories double as market-research reports; where everybody knows something about one another; and where Facebook knows everything about everyone and uses that knowledge to enrich itself in manifold uncomfortable ways.
The story of digital news, as told so far, seems to be leading to an equally bleak denouement. Yet there’s still time to write a better ending. News organizations must not allow slogans and corporate blandishments to take the place of true, collaborative innovation; they must find ways to use digital media to its best extent, rather than enabling its disfigurement for the sake of a few extra click-throughs. The open web and all it represents will wither if there is nobody to tend it; the news as a public good will not survive if its future rests in the hands of people who don’t actually care about the news.

Urban Dictionary:
1. Rohypnoled 35 up, 27 down
The verb of Rohypnol.
shut your face or you'll find yourself Rohypnoled.
1. Rohypnoled 35 up, 27 down
The verb of Rohypnol.
shut your face or you'll find yourself Rohypnoled.
2."padlocked intellect"
3."thimbleful of mind"
4."killer"
5."pedophile"
6."Recidivist Vegas Dicer"
7."Vegas Rohypnol Staggerer"
8."Deadman's Word Notes"...
52 Facebook Casino Reader Comment cards a week. Spit out randomly. Unerringly accurate.
This is not a channel-jamming con.
#1 Posted by Clayton Burns, CJR on Fri 18 Nov 2011 at 04:42 PM
Clayton blithers: 2."padlocked intellect" 3."thimbleful of mind" 4."killer" 5."pedophile" 6."Recidivist Vegas Dicer" 7."Vegas Rohypnol Staggerer" 8."Deadman's Word Notes"...
padikiller responds: Just stay away from "commie" and you'll be OK, Clayton...
In CJR-Land, it's OK to call someone a "racist pedophile"... But calling someone a "commie" is so "inflammatory" that censorship becomes necessary.
Shine on, you crazy diamond!
#2 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Fri 18 Nov 2011 at 10:38 PM
Economic Crisis, The Audit — November 18, 2011 07:56 PM
Audit Notes: Occupy Maybelline, Abramoff on the Revolving Door, News Corp.
By Ryan Chittum
[The Occupy Wall Street movement is already having its dissent commodified.
As BagNews shows, this Maybelline commercial shows its models prancing around in co-opted Occupy imagery...].
[Yeah, Ryan's link mentions that in an update:
"I just exchanged emails with Steve Hall from Adrants. Steve points out an important fact that I somehow missed. That is, that the video is a little over a year old. I apologize for the intimation that the ad was new and specifically designed to co-opt the Occupy movement...
Whoops.
#2 Posted by Thimbles on Sat 19 Nov 2011 at 06:10 PM].
There seems to be an issue with Ryan's post. I would solve problems of this kind by cooperating with good sites in Asia/Australia and the UK/Europe or elsewhere so as to maximize time zones.
If I were running the CJR site, errors would still be possible, but they would not stay up on the site this long. Or at least there would be an explanation by now.
CJR is not going to develop as a reader's site if machine-like reader comment posting is allowed. I mean padikiller/Thimbles or Thimbles/padikiller. They seem to be wrapped in a tight, unbreakable orbit.
There is no way to read and respond to such a flood of posts. I always reply to someone who comments on my posts, if I have time, but there seems to be no way to initiate a discussion with these two. Their posting is just too hectic.
I continue strongly to recommend that real names be used. If there is some critical information that has to be communicated otherwise, let an editor do it. Everyone, including the editors, should get three posts a day, no matter how short or long. No exceptions, period. Not even in the case of an oncoming nuclear winter. Why not try this system to see how it works? Otherwise, the site will not develop its potential. Comments get too rapidly buried in repetitive new ones.
There is little true interaction between writers and readers here, anyway. Manic posting will make that trend even worse. Ultimately, people may not take the site seriously in terms of reader comment.
#3 Posted by Clayton Burns, CJR on Sun 20 Nov 2011 at 12:01 AM
@Clayton
For someone who claims the inability to "initiate a conversation", you sure do publish a ton of material in the comments here.
Ryan isn't interested in accuracy - he'll clip any anti-corporate allegation he can find on some commie (note to Pravda.. er, I mean CJR censor - I'm not calling any particular person a "commie") site on the internet and slap it up as fact here in a New York minute.
Eventually, we'll get an "update" with an insincere explanation of how Maybelline is still an evil corporation, despite the fact that all of the factual allegations against it are wrong.
This OWS thing is nothing but a city block's worth of privileged white kids who went for a sleepover and a party. An undirected, incoherent suburbanite flash mob that ended the second the kitchen tent closed. Yet Ryan and his ilk would make it into a "movement" of some kind.
#4 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Sun 20 Nov 2011 at 07:39 AM
It seems to be impossible for 'padikiller' to get the message.
Let's say I'm running a business offering a useful service. But I have a nervous dog. As soon as a customer comes in, my neurotic dog gets into a frenzy and jumps all over the customer and pisses on him or her.
Then I would not have many customers. You are marking other posts by pissing on them, 'padikiller.' You are not trying to think carefully about how to create a good site for discussion.
Refraction is everything. I am supposed to be transformed by my experiences, not just hysterically reproduce my personality quirks. I am now reading "Microstyle," by Christopher Johnson. I suggest you do the same.
The private orbital lock with 'Thimbles' is a drag on the site.
The Mississippi between the writers and readers at this blog should be bridged. I expected a response to my comment at CJR's own 'Language Log' by now, but there has been nothing.
The site's e-mail addresses are clumsy and antique. justin.peters.cjr@columbia.edu should be the format. If we can't even get to square one with modernization, we may as well give up.
#5 Posted by Clayton Burns, CJR on Sun 20 Nov 2011 at 01:04 PM
Ok, folks, back on topic:
Does anyone else remember when "everyone" was on AOL?
Just sayin'.
#6 Posted by Edward Ericson Jr., CJR on Wed 1 Feb 2012 at 05:55 PM