September 12, 2008
Spotting the Spin in SpinSpotter
The Firefox plug-in called SpinSpotter was just introduced this week, and it's already creating a stir. Can software "de-spin the news, expose the slant and bias, separate the facts from axe-grinding opinion"?
I think the answer is clearly no. At least software cannot do such a thing until someone figures out a way to make software think--in this case, make software understand meaning and intention.
I just watched a presentation on SpinSpotter by founder Todd Herman at a "technology summit" that is part of the Missouri School of Journalism Centennial. There will be Q&A; time later today. I plan to ask Herman about the specific criticisms made by the writers of Language Log.
For example, Mark Lieberman wrote:
This might be an unusual type of demoware …, one that is released for general use in the hope that enough people will submit their proposed spin-spots to give the company enough free training data to actually develop some of the technology that they pretended to have in the first place.
It turns out he is correct. One of the first things Herman said this morning was that SpinSpotter is "very very beta" and "we want people to teach the technology." His video (not live) demonstration clearly showed that the software really can't do anything until people start using it, i.e. start flagging spin themselves.
What is not clear at all is what SpinSpotter will do with the data it collects. It looks like just a glorified word/phrase flagger. What a word/phrase means in the context of a particular article is something no software can determine. But the social networking aspect of the software is being used to convince users that it can be determined.
Users mark news articles and readers of the same articles will apparently be able to use the input of other users in real time. For example, user A says story X contains spin point Y so other readers of the same article will see spin point Y flagged. What happens when reader B reads story Z with spin point Y used in a different context?
As I said before, flagging words/phrases can certainly be useful to the extent that flagging helps one find what one is looking for. That's just the first step. The crucial step is the act of interpretation. That requires a human mind.
The trouble here is that Herman is making claims about what SpinSpotter can do that are clearly not possible. Consider this example from the rules of spin (in this case the rule of "Reporter's Voice") offered to guide users' flagging:
The reporter employs language (in the form of adjectives, adverbs, verbs, or superlatives) that conveys meaning beyond the supporting evidence provided in the article, and begs the question: In who's opinion and by what objective standard?
Flagging words is one thing. No software, however, can determine if the "evidence" supports the use of a particular adjective. Software can't do this because software doesn't know...anything.
SpinSpotter is really social-networking / cooperating software. To the extent that users flag and interpret the same article in real time it may be entertaining if not actually useful in combating spin.
UPDATE: I guess it's official. There is no spin to be found anywhere in the opinion section of The New York Times! :-) I'm "testing" SpinSpotter for myself. And, just as Mark Lieberman said, it doesn't do anything. No spin will be spotted until users spot the spin first. If users can already spot the spin for themselves, then what need do they have for SpinSpotter?
UPDATE: My day did not work out as planned. I was unable to attend the Q&A; session.
UPDATE: After more playtime with the software, and actually finding tags on a story about SpinSpotter, it is now (somewhat) clear to me that the SpinSpotter folks simply need to do a better job of explaining what the software does and how the software works. From what I can tell at this point, it only works on (and is only intended to work on) articles that have been flagged by a user. All this talk of algorithms makes it sound like the software is going to be making the judgments. I'm not at all sure this is what the SpinSpotter folks intend to convey.
Here's an example statement from the SpinSpotter: "The neat thing about the adaptive SpinSpotter technology is the ability to filter and identify the presence of spin in any news article, web site, press release, or thinly disguised political talk sheet." This seems to suggest that the software is going to do something I believe is impossible. Herman needs to take his own advice (from the rules of spin) and be clear about agency: It ain't the software that's going to "filter and identify the presence of spin in any news article." The users are going to do it with the help of the software.
Tags: journalism, rhetoric, politics
Posted by acline at 9:51 AM | | Spotlight
September 11, 2008
MU J-school Centennial
I'm attending the Missouri School of Journalism Centennial and dedication of the Reynolds Journalism Institute. I'll be here through tomorrow afternoon. The program includes many interesting panel discussions about the future of journalism. I'll write a full report when I return.
This morning I attended a presentation on Newspaper Next 2.0 -- an attempt at understanding a new business model for newspapers.
I'm waiting now to hear a panel on First Amendment issues.
Tomorrow I'll be attending the technology summit. It's offered in three tracks: digital story telling, disruptive innovations, and economics of the future. I'll be attending the disruptive track :-)
Tags: journalism, rhetoric, politics
Posted by acline at 3:40 PM | | Spotlight
September 10, 2008
Replaced By Software?
Can software do what Rhetorica does?
Correct answer: Hell no!
Check out this Firefox plugin called SpinSpotter. Looks interesting, huh? Now take a look at what the people who really know about such things think about it:
Dumb mag buys grammar goof spin fraud
Best part in the latter:
How do these print journalists get away with being so naive and trusting, in a world that they surely know is swimming with hustlers and press agents? Don't answer; that's a rhetorical question, a sort of written substitute for eye rolling and head tossing.
Now it could be that flagging certain kinds of words does have value to the person willing to do the hard work of interpretation--a tool such as Diction 5.0 for example. You can't just look at the results and then think you know something about the text.
SpinSpotter makes some contextual claims that are clearly outside the bounds of what software can handle. A program can count words in categories like Diction 5.0. It cannot think about them and interpret them. You have to do that for yourself.
Or you can read Rhetorica :-)
Tags: journalism, rhetoric, politics
Posted by acline at 1:05 PM | | Spotlight
September 9, 2008
Rhetorica Update: Technical Difficulties
Rhetorica is experiencing some technical difficulties. I'm working hard to correct them.
If anyone knows a person who can make the switch from MovableType to WordPress while preserving my design and archives, please have them contact me at arcline % rhetorica & net.
Thanks!
Posted by acline at 10:05 AM | | Spotlight
Why I Love Pundits (and TDS)
The sad thing is: Jon Stewart is about the only voice pointing out this stuff (he points it out on the left, too).
Tags: journalism, rhetoric, politics
Posted by acline at 8:14 AM | | Spotlight
September 8, 2008
The Rhetoric of Burgers
Where's the beef? In politics it's in the red meat of ideological battle. You'll also find it in the cheese of political spectacle. And, finally, you'll find it in the savory onion of victory. Or maybe it's just a hamburger, but I'll bet it's a damned good one.
Anthony Melhem, executive chef of Haldas Brothers Meats in Wilmington, Delaware has invented The Biden Burger as a way to celebrate Joe Biden's nomination for vice president. It's yummy. How do I know this? Because I've eaten lots of this guy's cooking. I grew up in Delaware. He married my sister.
Tags: journalism, rhetoric, politics
Posted by acline at 3:37 PM | | Spotlight
September 4, 2008
RNC Night #4
Tags: journalism, rhetoric, politics
Posted by acline at 10:55 AM | | Spotlight
The Press and John McCain
Jim Rutenberg's article in The New York Times today should be an embarrassment to, and a wake-up call for, the entire news media. Any journalist who becomes friends, or even friendly, with a politician he or she is covering is 1) foolish and 2) unethical.
The primary purpose of journalism is to give people the information they need to be free and self-governing. There's still a lot of debate about what kind of information that is. But what is not debatable is the simple idea that journalists cannot effectively cover politics as chummy pals of people with real power.
I do not think the press needs to go picking fights. I do not think effective journalism requires an adversarial stance. It requires that political reporters operate as custodians of fact with a discipline of verification, i.e. act like any other reporter covering any other news situation.
This is just horrifying:
When Republicans gathered at Madison Square Garden to celebrate President Bush’s second nomination four years ago, Senator John McCain gathered at a restaurant uptown with some of the biggest stars in journalism to celebrate his birthday. Among those mingling over cocktails and fine French food with Mr. McCain and his wife, Cindy, were Tom Brokaw, Peter Jennings, Bob Schieffer, Maureen Dowd, Tim Russert — “our people,” as an old campaign hand reminisced on Wednesday.
Our people.
Journalists that allow themselves to become "our people" to powerful politicians have stopped fulfilling the primary purpose of journalism. They become unethical fools.
John McCain isn't doing anything wrong. Any politician with a lick of sense will try to manipulate the news media. Message control is power. Always has been. Always will be. The problem for voters occurs when the press gladly allows itself to be manipulated.
Finally, if journalists are telling the proper story, their focus would be on citizens' experiences with governance more than on the celebrity of politics.
(A personal aside: During my first year working in journalism right out of college, a fellow reporter and I became friendly with a local judge. He was a nice fellow. Not much older than us. And we hung out with the guy. When our editor found out, well, he went ape-shit. He absolutely scared the living crap outta me. We were damned lucky to keep our jobs. Lesson learned. I should have known better. But power, and simple friendliness, can be seductive.)
[Editor's note: See comments re: edit in the lead.]
Tags: journalism, rhetoric, politics
Posted by acline at 10:30 AM | | Spotlight
September 3, 2008
RNC Night #3
Tags: journalism, rhetoric, politics
Posted by acline at 1:15 PM | | Spotlight
September 2, 2008
Audience Adjustment
The Columbia Journalism Review has published an interesting essay by David Cay Johnston called "Attitude Adjustment." It's about how the internet is good for journalism. The essay is worth your time.
Johnston focuses mostly on consumer news. The theory that supports his idea, however, is useful in understanding what has gone wrong in political reporting and how to make it better (i.e. make political reporting fit the primary purpose of journalism: to give people the information they need to be free and self-governing). Here it is:
But the larger trick here is a change in perspective about what is news, a move to frame it more in terms of audiences than sources. When you examine the way newspapers tend to frame some stories, it prompts questions about what audience is being addressed, and whether the way the news is written builds audiences or, by appealing primarily to narrow interests, shrinks them.
Exactly. The audience for political reporting is not citizens. How could it be? There's very little in "horse-race" or "inside baseball" reporting that citizens can put to use in making political decisions. The audience for such reporting is people inside the process, i.e. journalists and politicians.
I have a solution. Been talking about it for a long time now. And it fits Johnston's idea: Tell a different story; tell the story of citizens' experiences with governance.
Part of the problem here is that journalism has done a poor job of developing audiences (yes, plural). No one seemed to notice the problem until the internet exposed the faulty thinking: There is no such thing as a "general" audience.
In the epistemology of the old MSM, sources are the "knowers"--the ones who say what reality is. Journalists are then conduits of sources' knowing. The internet has taught people to talk back, taught them to expect to talk back, taught them to fight for what they know. So a whole new crop of knowers is showing up to the media party. And if they don't see themselves in the products of the MSM, then they aren't going to buy the products of the MSM.
Tags: journalism, rhetoric, politics
Posted by acline at 11:18 AM | | Spotlight
No Live Blogging Tonight
I have a schedule snafu. Very disappointing.
Posted by acline at 10:32 AM | | Spotlight
September 1, 2008
No Live Blogging Tonight
John McCain and the the Republican leadership have made the right choice to suspend all but routine convention business for this evening.
Tags: journalism, rhetoric, politics
Posted by acline at 10:24 AM | | Spotlight
August 30, 2008
Rhetorica Update
I've changed my plans. I going to wait until after the RNC to analyze the two acceptance speeches. Live blogging and on-the-fly analyses so far have been fun. But, really, I don't want to be auditioning for a role as campaign pundit. I still plan to live blog the RNC.
Posted by acline at 12:53 PM | | Spotlight
August 28, 2008
DNC Night #4
Tags: journalism, rhetoric, politics
Posted by acline at 2:40 PM | | Spotlight
"You Want My Asinine Analysis"
Oh, yeah. Best media criticism on television:
Tags: journalism, rhetoric, politics
Posted by acline at 2:32 PM | | Spotlight
Note About Tonight's Live Blogging
I'll be attending a watch party at a local hotel. I understand there is a wifi. I'll arrive early to scout out a good location, i.e. near an electrical outlet. A hitch could develop in the system. Just FYI.
Also: I'll do a short analysis of the speeches by Bill Clinton, Joe Biden, and Barack Obama on Saturday because my day tomorrow is booked solid.
Posted by acline at 12:35 PM | | Spotlight
Remember Those Who Did Not Live to See This Day
What we'll witness tonight was unimaginable 45 years ago.
When we let freedom ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, "Free at last! free at last! thank God Almighty, we are free at last!"
Go read, or listen to, the whole thing.
Tags: journalism, rhetoric, politics
Posted by acline at 11:43 AM | | Spotlight
How to Notice a Theme
The other day I briefly discussed live blogging and wondered what good it is. I found that (potential) good in the conversation that the Cover It Live software makes possible.
What has always bugged me about live blogging (my doing it anyway) is that if you go for speed you sacrifice depth, and if go for depth you miss a lot of good stuff. That's obviously an over-simplification.
But with active participants in the live blogging, good things can begin to happen. For example, those who have been participating with me (4 at one point last night!) have identified, and begun to discuss, interesting themes at the DNC. We've identified the "future" theme, the "kitchen-table" theme, and the "warrior" theme. You might also call these memes or emerging master narratives. Or, as the third umpire says, "they ain't nuthin' 'til I calls 'em." (In case you don't know the routine, the first ump says "I calls 'em as I sees 'em," and the second ump says "I calls 'em as they are.")
So while any given live blogging session here is shallow and somewhat goofy, we can mine the text for its gems and elaborate on them later. There's the value.
Tags: journalism, rhetoric, politics
