Assignment #1: Carebot

carebotRecently, I learned that the NPR Visuals Team is building a new tool “for gathering, analyzing and distributing better analytics” about audience engagement. That tool – Carebot – is still in the development stage, with a prototype due out in a couple of months. The implications for creating “affecting stories, not clickbait,” however, make for an intriguing addition to the media landscape.

The Concept

NPR Visuals has been stewing on this issue for awhile now. In the words of their senior editor, Brian Boyer, NPR Visuals exists to “make people care.” But how would a newsroom determine that their audience cares? Carebot stems directly from this question.

  • Visual content is uniquely positioned to bring people to a difficult topic, or a news story far removed from their own lives. But the “care” concept could apply to any news piece.
  • Traditional metrics of journalistic success such as pageviews and unique hits have been gamed and exploited (think cat videos vs. a long-form investigative piece).
  • NPR Visuals has started analog explorations of how their audience engages with their content, and how they think about their user in the content design. Is it a matter of completion rate? Time spent per page? Calls to action?
  • They hope that Carebot will be a more immediate, comprehensive, and transferrable tool to assess the impact of news storytelling on the audience they want to reach.

Where They’re Going

With the help of a grant from the Knight Foundation, NPR Visuals is hoping to build a new way to count and calculate the numbers.

  • Carebot will pull data from multiple sources, including Chartbeat, Google Analytics, and social networking sites. It will focus on both engagement – likes, shares, etc. – as well as time spent with a story and stories finished.
  • The measurement output will rely on a formula – still TBD – that spits out a “care metric” for any given piece.
  • Potentially, 1,000,000 pageviews could be outpaced by a story with 1,000 views and 100 shares – depending on the calculation and weight of other metrics.
  • Carebot is likely to be built into a website – and be shared as open source programming – but isn’t likely to be an analytics dashboard. Boyer describes the need to get journalists’ (and their bosses’) attention, perhaps with a simple email or other notification on their stories’ success in making their readers care.

Why It Matters

Carebot will join a small host of other publications and organizations developing new ways to “emphasize caring over clicks.” But this isn’t just a navel-gazing exercise, or a renewed gnashing of the teeth over viral media. Carebot asks important questions about impact and success, financial support, and what we want from journalism.

  • Of course, NPR (with its sponsorship model) doesn’t have to worry about advertising money as much as the next guy. Yet with some evidence that advertisers want more specific metrics, too, Carebot could help bolster the importance of the less “clickworthy” – but more worthwhile – news stories.
  • For NPR Visuals, Carebot will “test an idea: that better analytics make for better journalism.”
  • Measuring audience engagement turns the industry back to the idea of user satisfaction, rather than the satisfaction of other stakeholders.
  • If caring is celebrated, will journalists be freed to do different work? Will that work be better? More meaningful? Edifying? Representative? Lofty questions, indeed, but Carebot could be a start to answering them.
Posted in All

FOLD adds new dimensions to your stories

What is FOLD?
FOLD is an open publishing platform where users can find and create modular stories, i.e., articles where text is supported by multimedia and interactive cards. The platform was developed in 2015 in the MIT Center for Civic Media and has been growing organically, with hundreds of users in many countries and languages.

Fold's homepage

Features

  • Every story in FOLD can be built using two kind of cards:
  1. The narrative cards are the anchoring narrative, they help you to communicate the message in a traditional way: Just text and hyperlinks. Imagine them like paragraphs.
  2. The context cards are linked to words or sentences in the narrative cards, and display multimedia content (e.g. gifs, videos, audio, photographs) to have a better understanding of the central narrative without losing focus of it.
  • Users can take any contextual card of any story and use it to build their own articles; I hadn’t seen this interactivity with small multimedia pieces of information in other platforms. “We want to make it really easy to reuse pieces of a story, and also to trace back where they came from, so you can find related content easily,” said to me Alexis Hope, co-founder of FOLD.
  • As in other publishing sites, you can follow users, filter the stories, and create lists of favorites.
  • Right now the interactivity between users is pretty much limited. You can’t comment or annotate stories, nor send messages to the authors.
  • Storybench posted a detailed explainer of how easy is to create a new story on FOLD.

What makes Fold different?
I see FOLD as the Ikea of the publishing platforms: It gives you the small pieces of information that you need to build your own object of knowledge. Oh, and as in Ikea, FOLD’s design is beautiful.

FOLD is one of the closest approaches I’ve known to a non-linear narrative. Even though it uses words as a nucleus, the design of the platform and the interactivity with the contextual cards allow a new approach to the text. As Matt Carroll said in a recent article about FOLD: “It’s a really clever idea that lets you add context on the side without impacting the flow of the story.”

How is it being used?
In less than a year, FOLD has become a place of amazing explainers, from complex topics as Molecular Biotechnology or Reaction-Diffusion systems, to lessons that we can learn from Zombies or alternatives to solve Inequality.

The platform is used by students, scholars, journalists and scientists who are willing to share their knowledge with a general public. “Things that tell you how to do something, or how to understand something, that’s the type of content people is using the platform for”, says Alexis Hope, “We’re really trying to create a network of explainers.”

Inspirations
I asked Alexis Hope about the referents of FOLD, she mentioned some of them:
Vox
Wikipedia
Rap Genius
Storify
Medium

Challenges

  • As the content must be in the platform, it can be hard to grow the user base. Should there be a way to embed the modular stories in other websites?
  • How to monetize the idea? Native advertising? Membership?
  • The current mobile version works, but not as good as in a desktop browser. Does FOLD need an app?

FOLD and the Future of News

content-map-fold

Actual navigation map in FOLD

In this moment FOLD is a great tool for journalists and storytellers who want to add a layer of multimedia context to their work: It makes things easier to understand, and is easy to use. But in this section I want to suggest another possibility of FOLD.

I like the metaphor behind the platform’s name. When you’re using a desktop browser to read a story on FOLD, you can see a content map in the lower right corner of the screen. That map looks just like an unfolded polyhedron, like an origami piece ready to assemble:  you just have to organize the cards, fold them, and then you will have a unique body of knowledge, a three-dimensional idea, something that you couldn’t imagine with the alphabet and the printing press.

polygon-to-polyhedron

Modular cards could build three dimensional ideas to explore in VR.

Continuing with the metaphor, you could adapt the unfolded ‘3D ideas’ (that is, the stories that we can publish in the current platform) to VR technologies. Every modular card would become a face of a three dimensional ‘body of information’ with which other users could interact.

VR News

We could inhabit an idea made of  pieces of information.

FOLD’s concept opens new ways of imagining news and stories, and the story of the platform is just beginning.

Jia Zhang

Hi!
I’m a phd student working with interactive maps and data visualizations here in the Media Lab. My background is in visual art and interaction design.

I am interested in how journalists use maps and visualizations. I am a big fan of Amanda Cox and cannot express how excited I am about her new role as editor of the Upshot. I want to build visualization tools for professional and amateur storytellers alike.

1472086_10153515742355335_518222451_nI would like to focus on becoming a better writer through this class. I am especially excited to learn from so many great journalists and writers in the class. I would also like to work on a few map/dataviz-based projects that will contribute to my dissertation research if the opportunity comes up.

 

Relevant skills: visual design, python, front end web dev, javascript, processing, and mandarin.

Snapchat – Discover stories, daily stories

Snapchat, the temporary media-sharing app, has quickly become commonplace among news outlets, both through the “Discover” feature and by posting daily stories, much like a typical snapchat user.

The “Discover” feature was released about a year ago, expanding the app beyond sharing photos and videos between personal networks of friends. “Discover” stories allow users to explore daily stories by publication outlets such as Vice, Mashable, National Geographic, Vox and most recently, WSJ. Snapchat Discover stories are structured as a slideshow which the user can swipe through. Usually, each panel is accompanied by a story, which the user can choose to scroll down to read and share with their friends (notably, with the normal drawing / emoji annotations that a user can do with any other snap they send).

What separates Snapchat Discover stories from other web-based posting is that in Snapchat, you can’t link to content anywhere else — the user is forced to consume the story within Snapchat without clicking on external links or enlarging photos. From my personal observations, there seems to be two camps of Snapchat publishing philosophies: one, use each slide for a separate story (like reading the headlines from a newspaper) or two, focus on a particular issue or moment and present different perspectives on that particular story. For example, WSJ tends to present stories in the first format while Vox takes the second approach, using slides to present infographics on a story or quotes from interviewees.

Lately, publishers have been taking to Snapchat to engage with users in a more typical Snapchat fashion by posting daily stories. Users can add publishers by username (for example, “npr”). This particular use of Snapchat lends itself to a more interactive experience — for example, NPR will often explicitly solicit feedback from users viewing a Snapchat story, and users can send photos, videos or text in response. For example, most recently, NPR posted to Snapchat about the Bernie Sanders / Hillary Clinton meme, asking if it was sexist and to reply by “snapping” back. In addition, reporters tend to appear in these stories in a very casual format and basically have conversations (albeit in 10-second segments) about a story that they’re reporting on at the moment.

As for the implications Snapchat has for the future of news and storytelling, it’s clear that Snapchat is a medium which encourages interactivity in a different medium than other forms of social media — not only among friends, but now between users and publications, which previously was a large barrier. Publishing daily “Discover” stories encourages publishers to be deliberate about using only a few slides and tailoring their content to millennials — an issue that is top of mind for publishers today.

Posted in All

Interactive Graphics that Invite Participation

Participatory interactive graphics(?) are visualizations that are designed to change around data from individual readers. These graphics use information solicited from the user or the user’s computer as a lens through which complex data or very general data is presented. This kind of interaction is increasingly important in storytelling.

Here are 3 types of stories I have come across that fall into this category.

Screen Shot 2016-02-09 at 11.05.57 AMScreen Shot 2016-02-09 at 11.48.17 AM1. Calculators and searchable interfaces – These searchable or adjustable interfaces allow users to glimpse the larger underlying system by answering each user’s targeted questions. Examples: “How The Internet* Talks” and “Is It Better to Rent or Buy?”

Screen Shot 2016-02-09 at 11.22.38 AMScreen Shot 2016-02-09 at 11.22.51 AM2. Draw your own/quizzes – Soliciting educated guesses of trends from users to involve them in thinking about the logic behind trends and increase impact. Example:  “You Draw It: How Family Income Predicts Children’s College Chances“ 

Screen Shot 2016-02-09 at 11.18.35 AM3. Geolocating Users – Using ip addresses to geolocate users and automatically alter the view and accompanying text of the visualization to be centered around a user’s location. This is used in navigating general and comprehensive datasets that cover the whole country but are only of interest to most readers as smaller slices. Example: “The Best and Worst Places to Grow Up: How Your Area Compares” 

I think these types of interaction are not only an important tool for storytelling online, but can affect larger patterns for reading online for several reasons.
1. They might be more readily shareable across social media because of how specific they are to the interest of a reader.
2. Commenting is problematic on many online articles. I think using this specific type of interaction can potentially serve as a filter for comment reading, and provide constructive directions for comment writing and discussion among readers.
3. Finally, this kind of interaction could serve as a dynamic filter for customizing out links from the article and effect recommendations.

There are discussions to be had on whether the data gathered from interacting with graphics should be used for purposes of catering content. I’m not sure yet how I feel about editorial decisions that might be increasingly challenged by the metrics of social media and how this addition contributes to the discussion. I would like to know more about how feedback is currently weighted in the newsroom. Ultimately, this interaction may result in more stories being force fit into a data-centric model that is less good than what we have now. There are also definitely issues with the quality of the data being gathered from this type of interaction, which is an interesting area of study once there is a large enough sample size.

I do believe experimenting with this type of input is ultimately worth it and could change the way we look at readers and frame select stories in a positive way. Actively using reader input is a important concept for storytelling. It is not new, but it is adoption within interactive graphics has presented very exciting recent use cases and it is a topic that I would like to explore further.

Sravanti Tekumalla

Hi, I’m Sravanti!

11885691_10154334130142281_5778489736523912393_o (1)

I’m a current senior at Wellesley College studying computer science and I’m interested in the intersection between technology and journalism — specifically, how to apply my computer science knowledge to create tools that can help journalists parse data in a meaningful, clear way, whether that be through data analysis tools or data visualization tools.

I’m coming to this class after finishing up a stint as Editor of my college paper, The Wellesley News. During my time at The News, I also started  an online team which created, and now maintains, our website as well as our social media presence.

Skills-wise, I have some reporting and editing experience from the journalism side. From the tech side of things, I’m good with Java, Python, JavaScript and web development-related things. I’m excited to learn a lot in this class, and to create with all of you!

The “edited video” plug-in proposal

I do not come from a background of journalism, but rather one where journaling and voicing various realities is an urgency that lead myself and a lot of people I know into various forms of blogging, formal print, citizen-journalism, etc.

While I feel these forms of non-centric ventures of “telling the truth,” are crucial to the overall local/global narrative, their DIY “aesthetic” has opened much leeway to create fake and misleading content that is presented as truth-from-the-ground. I’m prompted by this example of a Vandalism in Brussels video to propose a possible tool for the newsroom. Before I get into that, the video’s story is similar to many videos that surface on online platforms that end up being debunked as inauthentic. There are two versions of the video, one ending with an “Allah Akbar” scream, and one without. It has been said that the “Allah Akbar” has been added to the video to further feed European Islamophobia. On social media platforms, this is hot stuff, and the “Allah Akbar” version has been viewed over 200,000 times.

With the speed of news and contemporary life, opinions are made on first reads/views without further investigation in the world of the mainstream. I speculate that not more than 10% of the above 200,000 views will rectify their impressions of Islam in Europe. Not a lot of people rectify their views on a lot of political issues on their own without the intervention of the media anyways.

In thinking of a potential tool that could change the newsroom, I would start by expanding the newsroom to include social media platforms as venues of uncurated content as well as traditional newsrooms. While there are a lot of differences, both are confronted with content they need to verify. What if there’s a tool that would automatically notify its viewer both in a media outlet office or in a newsfeed if the video they’re watching was edited or not. I’m not a coder, so I’m not sure how this could be done, but (1) I can draw an analogy with TrueCaller‘s spam alert. TrueCaller is a mobile application that crowdsources its users phonebooks to create a mega caller id system. It has an option to mark certain numbers as spam, and the entire TrueCaller community benefits from this information. Following this logic, this proposed tool could be a plug-in that is fed a binary “edited or not edited” tag to videos on the web by a media-watch crowdsource-operational team. This way, viewers do not rely on their contacts “sharing” a debunked video, but benefit from a global community working on that.

(2) In another presumably more complicated format, this tool could be developed by finding a way to scan a video for recorded natures. If there is a way to pin down whether the audio and the video were recorded together, or by the same device, ruling out doctored videos, then this could also be another way of going about it. In both cases, I see this as a plug-in in platforms where people already view videos as opposed to a specialized site that you need to go and verify videos, mainly due to fatigued audiences that won’t go the extra mile.

Posted in All

Raafat Majzoub

10672330_716704588399416_5060821667719807523_n

Hey!

I’m a Lebanese architect, artist and writer. I am invested in creating a network narrative system where the writing of imagined fiction is coupled with a research and construction process that scripts it into reality — writing as architecture.

My work revolves around a borderless Arab World and has taken various forms as outlets such as film, video, interactive performance, public installation, journalism, erotic and children’s literature. My novel “The Perfumed Garden: An Autobiography of Another Arab World” will hopefully be published soon.

One of my previous projects that is most relevant to journalism is The Outpost, a magazine of possibilities in the Arab World. I co-founded the magazine with Ibrahim Nehme, its editor-in-chief, and was its creative director for the first two years. You can find some info on it here: 

Links:

raafatmajzoub.com

236m3.com

theperfumedgarden.info

the farewell chronicles (weekly column)

Twitter Moments

Twitter Moments

The internet has completely uprooted the foundations of the printing press. A material company is constrained by how many copies of a certain product it can produce cost effectively. The internet allows for the creation of unlimited copies for no cost at all. With the integration of the internet into people’s lives came the integration of social media into people’s lives. And, brilliantly, Facebook, social-media-gargantuan, has come to incorporate news into their platform, and thus again into people’s lives.
Initially Facebook was much less news based than it currently is. More and more people consult Facebook for their news. The percentage of people who use Facebook for news is up 16% from 2013. Now 63% of Facebook users consume news while on Facebook (http://www.journalism.org/2015/07/14/news-use-on-facebook-and-twitter-is-on-the-rise/). As Facebook redefines the consumption of news for the average person, other social media groups will likely gain traction as sources of news. When people become more comfortable with the idea of using their social media for news, I suspect Twitter’s “Moments” section will become quite popular. Twitter has a platform that is quick and casual, allowing users to use the mobile app for mere seconds at a time effectively. For better or worse, I see the current direction of news as becoming generally more casual. In order to support that idea, Twitter has a pretty solid news section. Under Moments users can choose between News, Sports, Entertainment, and Fun. Those are some pretty palatable divisions of information, really. Lots of people could probably choose at least three out of four of those sections to just be lumped together under “Fun.” Users can immediately engage in discussion on any topic by tweeting to the hashtag of any event. To open the news section, users touch one button, and then can swipe through different stories.
With such a low barrier of entry and access to immediate interaction and conversation about any given article, I see Twitter’s Moments section as a likely platform/tool to facilitate an ever-more-casual, more prompt news system.

Posted in All

Civil Comments: A New Way to Create Civil Online Conversation?

The tool I’m interested in is Civil Comments.

How it Works

Their video offers a great overview of the system.

Civil Comments – How It Works from Civil Co. on Vimeo.

Why It’s Interesting

The Civil Comments tool provides an interesting intervention in the comments space, because it offers a unique but also intuitive answer to some of the key problems facing online content publishers when it comes to their comments.

  1. The Expense of Moderating, Especially at Scale – many content publishers currently face a huge problem when it comes to moderating comments. Most moderation requires a human editor. Although many tools will automatically filter out abusive terms, it still takes a human moderator with judgment (and maturity!) to read user-flagged comments. For publishers who deal with heavy content volume, human moderation can be very expensive. By leveraging the power of the audience, Civil offers to make comment moderation free, and scalable. This is huge. The Civil interface is also pretty simple – it looks a lot like TripAdvisor’s or Amazon’s ratings, which are proven interfaces that people like to use.
  2. Limiting incentives to abuse – the most thought-provoking claim that Civil makes is that they’re able to single out abusive commenters through this crowd-sourced system. I’m not entirely sure if that’s the case, but their initial run with Willamette week appears to have garnered some positive reviews. Although untrained folks may NOT always be able to filter out abusive comments, this crowd-moderated system raises some interesting questions about the incentives to post uncivil commentary. If comments are social, as many people (including Joseph Reagle of Northeastern, in his book on the topic) have suggested, then that begs the question: if only 1 or 2 people at most are going to see an abusive comment before it gets buried, will trolls even want to post abuse in this kind of system? Is the incentive to abuse lessened when there’s no audience? When it comes to mass troll attacks, Civil claims they have a system that will detect them.
  3. Hierarchy? Values? By enabling a form of peer moderation, it’s possible that publishers who use the Civil system will send a positive message about the role that their community plays in setting the site’s values. It also marks the comment section as an independent space, one where both readers and journalists get to set priorities. At the same time, because readers get random comments to review, this peer moderation system might offer ways to avoid some of the bias (towards highly ranked commenters, towards familiar commenters, towards early comments) that other peer moderation systems are prone to (Lampe et al).

What it Won’t (Necessarily) Do

  1. Eliminate issues of site-wide bias: Many moderators of peer moderated sites whom I’ve spoken to have mentioned that their sites have a particular political bias. I don’t see that Civil will address site-wide bias very effectively, especially considering that people tend to moderate comments more favorably when those comments reflect their own views.
  2. Invite minority views/communities into conversations. One of the moderators whom I spoke with offered a compelling case study of how their site had drawn flak from trans members about transphobic language. The moderators made an executive decision to change community norms, and enforce those changes, even though the majority of site users weren’t as affected by the issue. Sometimes moderators might want to enforce values/etc that the community does not. How are these more subtle social norms introduced? How are they maintained and shown to new members who are visiting for the first time? It seems like the initial judgment made by the crowd might be a large-grained filter at best, and exclusionary at worst.
  3. Protect identities and data. Conspicuously absent from the Civil Comments’ webpage: any mention of what happens to users’ comment data. Civil says that they offer analytics, which means that they must collect data or offer a data collection option. But publishers run their own ‘instances’ of Civil. How are those data stored and anonymized? Who has access? Will Civil turn around and sell that information? Particularly relevant in conjunction with point #2, but problems of online harassment in general.