Not Your Grandma’s Privacy

My grandma’s a cool lady.

A couple of months ago, after getting a new computer, my sister signed Grandma up for a Facebook account. And while she doesn’t post to Facebook much, I know she logs in on a regular basis, to see what her fifteen friends—nearly all of them family—are up to.

I know this even though she never comments on my page, she calls me when she sees something I’ve posted that she thinks is worth discussing … like she did last week, after I posted some information about the house I’m buying with my boyfriend.

“I’m concerned about your Facebook. What if the sellers see your post and don’t sell you the house? And what’s with this comment on the link from someone who says he’s put in an offer over list price?”

“It’s a joke, Grandma.”

“But what if the sellers see it, think they can do better, and don’t accept your offer?”

“They won’t see it, Grandma.”

And so it went, until, finally, I had to remind my grandmother that hey, Facebook is part of my job so she should trust me on this issue. My Facebook profile is on more or less complete lockdown. I stopped short of making myself entirely unfindable (because that’s kind of annoying), but if you search for me on Facebook and we’re not friends, this is all you see:

It’s enough to let you know if you’ve tracked down the right Jill Ivey: a photo of me, my current city, and (for those people from high school trying to get back in touch), my hometown … but nothing else. So Grandma’s fears were unfounded. The sellers of our home-to-be had no way of being in on the conversation happening on my wall.

My privacy is important to me. With every change to Facebook’s privacy policy, I’ve been sure to learn what’s changed and how it affects my account, then update my settings accordingly. But this blog post isn’t about Facebook’s ever-changing, somewhat controversial, now-theoretically-streamlined, privacy policy, which Kira covered recently. This is a post about personal responsibility and common sense.

Stories about people not getting into college/not getting a job/experiencing some other calamity because of their Facebook posts are commonplace now … and yet they keep springing up. Some people, it seems, just don’t know when it’s time to back away from the computer and think before hitting “publish.” This isn’t as important if you’ve set your privacy dial to eleven, like I have. But if your profile is less locked down, anything that will be visible to people outside of your immediate circle of friends—seen by clients, coworkers, or complete strangers—whether it’s a post about your upcoming vacation or photos of your weekend shenanigans, needs to be subjected to some special consideration.

I’ll call it the Grandma test. How would your Grandma feel if she was looking at your profile? Would she call you like mine did, concerned about what other people would think if they saw your latest post? If the answer is yes, then don’t hit publish—or if you do, make sure you understand just how many people are going to see your post.

Back when Grandma was my age, people kept their private lives private and were thoughtful about those parts of themselves they chose to share with the world. And what’s wrong with doing things a little old school now and then?

The Evolution of Facebook: A Pro and Con Debate

Prior to 2004, the definition of a “facebook” was a pamphlet given out each fall to college freshmen that contained the names and faces of every student in their incoming class—a handy little who’s who of yearbook-style thumbnails that maybe even listed everyone’s hometown. By the time I arrived at college in the fall of 2005, the word had taken on a new definition.

The premise was similar, but the “book” was online, and in addition to hometown, you could see the political views, relationship status and favorite quote—ranging from the Dalai Lama to Lil Wayne—of your friends and anyone who shared your college network. You could even write messages on their “walls”, the Internet equivalent of the ubiquitous white boards tacked to the doors in every residence hall. I remember feeling acutely distressed when I finally got a Facebook account late that summer, and discovered that I was way behind the curve: my future classmates were already making friends and planning meet ups. Clearly I was doomed to be alone.

Well, I managed to catch up once the year started, but my little case of freshman anxiety proved just how quickly Facebook was spreading, and foretold of how omnipresent it would become.

Since then, Facebook has taken on a life of its own: one that founder Mark Zuckerburg probably never imagined when he launched it from his Harvard dorm room. In the next few weeks, Facebook will claim it’s 500 millionth user—slightly less than the population of North America.

But with this growth comes a growing list of pros and cons. Most obviously, Facebook retains its original purpose. As Jill remarked on the blog a few months ago, Facebook is the most convenient and direct way to stay in touch with people you likely would’ve fallen out of contact with if Facebook didn’t exist. It’s nice to feel connected at the click of a mouse. Facebook can also be a great networking and marketing tool. My sister is interning for a non-profit this summer, and one of her major projects is to figure out the best way for the organization to utilize Facebook to gain followers and recognition.

Of course, there are drawbacks too, many of which we’ve discussed before. For the last few years, Facebook has repeatedly come under fire for its ambiguous, complex privacy settings which allow third party sources to access certain information about you unless you specifically opt out. Just two days ago, a New York Times blog considered the benefits of a government takeover of the website in order to reign in the chaos. Earlier this week, Zuckerberg himself published an op-ed in the Washington Post to address some of the privacy concerns felt by millions of disgruntled users, and just this morning, Facebook unveiled new privacy controls which are aimed at shifting control back to the user—it remains to be seen if they are up to snuff.

And like any pop culture phenomenon worth its salt, Facebook was recently featured on South Park. The episode pokes fun at society’s sometimes compulsive obsession with the site—the need to up one’s friend count, the necessity of returning a poke from one’s grandma. South Park humorously comments on how easily we become engrossed in the virtual, and neglect our reality.

In six short years, Facebook has gone from an Ivy League social outlet to a household name, fodder for parodies and a regular subject of the news. And in another six years, who knows what the state of Facebook will be? It’s hard to believe that it could become much more accessible or widespread than it already is—but for some reason, I don’t doubt the possibility. Astronauts Facebooking from space? Don’t count it out. Until then, we’ll have to wait and see.

Green Giants

Flickr user jimmywayne

It’s Earth Day! In Philadelphia, even our Mayor is getting involved, with his pre-holiday announcement that he plans to make Philadelphia the nation’s greenest city by 2015. Mayor Nutter isn’t the only notable green mayor: San Francisco (where we spent some time last month) has Gavin Newsom; Phoenix has Phil Gordon; even New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has been praised for his efforts to make the Big Apple more sustainable.

Increasingly, the efforts of these mayors, as well as the work of other, less political green advocates and innovators, are appearing in the mainstream press. But before “green” became a hot topic sure to sell magazines and newspapers, a handful of blogs were dedicating their resources to promoting energy efficiency, sustainable living, slow foods and other environmentally-friendly coverage. And even with sustainability now leading issues of Time Magazine and earning multi-page spreads in The New York Times, it’s really the bloggers who still lead the way in environmentally focused coverage. So we wanted to dedicate this year’s Earth Day blog post to these green bloggers: some have been around for years, some just a few months, but all are consistently ahead of the curve.

Planet Green/Treehugger
Both part of the Discovery television network, Planet Green and Treehugger have not only been very generous with their coverage of ELISE clients, but also have become two of our go-to outlets for resources about sustainable innovation; healthy, organic recipes; and tips for greening our households (who knew vinegar could work so much magic?) If you’ve never poked around Planet Green and Treehugger, we strongly suggest you go do it just as soon as you’re finished reading the rest of this post.

Inhabitat
Inhabitat’s tagline, “design will save the world,” does a better job of summing up their website than we ever could. Looking at technology and practices that can someday direct us towards a “smarter and more sustainable future,” the blog (where we have also secured coverage) isn’t just concerned with what’s green: it’s concerned with what’s green, designed well, and infinitely practical, whether in the developed or developing world. Plus, hey, lots of pretty pictures.

Dot Earth
Although Andrew C. Revkin is no longer regularly contributing to the New York Times‘ print edition, his popular, informative Dot Earth blog is still going strong. Concerned with the effect that the earth’s growing population will have on our shared natural resources, the Times blog is opinionated and informative, based as much on hard facts as deep convictions. We kind of love it.

Care2
Less a blog than a community portal, Care2 encourages visitors to not just educate themselves about being green, but also to get involved in green causes and to interact with others who might have similar interests. Send an e-card, sign a petition, or vote in a poll. The blog posts are still there, but Care2 uses its platform to be so much more.

NextBillion
NextBillion isn’t a green blog, per se, but the site, which focuses on the connection between development and enterprise, operates on the explicit understanding that sustainable technology is also, sometimes, the easiest and most affordable to disseminate in the developing world. And we’re not just saying that because NextBillion has covered our clients.

Grist
One of the oldest blogs on our list, Grist approaches its reporting on sustainability and the environment with a sense of humor, encouraging readers to “Laugh now—or the planet gets it.” Filled with original reporting and in-depth analysis on other outlets’ green stories, Grist explains their light-hearted tone in a way that would be less endearing if their content wasn’t so consistently informative: “At Grist, we take our work seriously, but we don’t take ourselves too seriously. Because of the many things this planet is running out of, sanctimonious tree-huggers ain’t one of them. ”

The GOOD Blog
Although GOOD produces a monthly print magazine, it’s their blog that we visit on a regular basis (and that a few of our clients have contributed to) for upbeat profiles of young green inventors and optimistic suggestions for people looking to trade Subaru for Schwinn. Like NextBillion.net, The GOOD Blog is not explicitly “green,” but emphasizes the idea that sustainability and responsibility help us all.

Green Is Sexy
Actress Rachel McAdams, who is pretty sexy herself, started this blog with two friends to spread the word that a handful of tiny lifestyle changes can make a big impact on the world around us. Filled with tips for everything from road trips to beauty tips, Green is Sexy is chock full of eco-minded suggestions that seem obvious, but you might not have thought of yourself.

Triple Pundit
For anyone who associates the green movement with “hippies,” Triple Pundit is here to prove you wrong, examining the business of green and a triple bottom line—people, planet, profit. This is not where to go for advice on a good, non-toxic toilet cleaner. Instead, check out posts on Deutsche Bank’s renovated German headquarters or BP shareholders.

World Changing
With contributors around the globe, World Changing is the closest thing we’ve seen to an independent, green-focused media conglomerate. The Seattle-based nonprofit posts content ranging from contaminated water in the third world to the effect of climage change on some of the world’s most developed cities, and is consistently rated as one of the top eco mags in the Nielsen Net Ratings system.

Tweet Well (Part 1)

Flickr user jez`

I have a love-hate relationship with Twitter.

I’m logged into it all day for ELISE, and find it to be a fantastic resource. I’ve connected with other PR pros, found out who’s talking about our clients and reached out to journalists we couldn’t track down through more conventional means. Even on days when we’re not sending tweets, we all take some time over the course of the day to make sure we’re not missing out on any big news. (How do you think we learned of Michael Jackson’s untimely demise or the earthquake in Haiti?) And services like HootSuite and TweetDeck, both of which I use daily, allow users to filter out some static by monitoring key words in which they’re especially interested.

That’s when I love Twitter. But when I hate it, my animosity sometimes overshadows my love. It’s an animosity that I also feel for advertisers who run uninteresting Super Bowl commercials, bus passengers who talk too loudly on their cell phones and retailers who don’t honor competitors’ coupons: it’s a hatred of not understanding the power and reach of your chosen platform. Think about it:

• Super Bowl advertisers have a captive audience that wants to watch commercials almost as badly as they want to watch the game; if your commercial is boring, it could provide the 30 seconds your television audience needs to go open another beer.
• On the phone on a bus? Small metal spaces tend to make sound project, and now everyone knows about that nasty fungus you picked up at the gym.
• If you’re not honoring your competitors’ discounts, people will just go make that purchase—and the rest of their purchases—at your competitors’ stores, too.

So why would you provide bad information, share too much or ignore other people in your field, in your Twitter feed? These behaviors aren’t just bad practice; they’re downright rude. Not rude in the conventional sense—nasty or insulting—just rude in that they show utter disregard for the power and reach of Twitter as a platform and the engagement of people who use it.

There are approximately 75 million registered Twitter users worldwide. That’s a lot of content to sift through. People who provide good information or entertaining content or relevant news naturally get followers. People who send out pointless or self-promoting tweets, or who tweet out too much, too often, without showing that they’re listening to the conversations happening around (or about) them naturally lose followers. Being polite in your tweets by sharing carefully selected, useful or enjoyable information instead of flooding Twitter with a stream of posts nobody cares about will get you far.

And as to that content nobody cares about? You’ll have to tune in next time for some pointers on best practices for courtesy in the Twitterverse.

Is Overshare the New Norm?

Last fall, our awesome ELISE intern, Kira Loretto, wrote a thoughtful post about the potential harm social media can inflict on your career. People are beginning to learn this: don’t post photos of yourself engaging in illegal activity without making sure that nobody you don’t want to see them, can. Don’t set your Facebook status to read: “Don’t feel like going to work today. Calling in ’sick,’” if you’re friends with your boss.

But what about the things we post on-line that aren’t damaging … just annoying? In an article about Twitter for the New York Times last month, David Carr expressed the problem that many people have with social media platforms: nobody cares what you had for breakfast. Carr makes the argument that in spite of this, Twitter is a useful tool: you just have to be selective about who you follow.

Easier said than done. Aside from proving valuable resources for information, social media services like Facebook and Twitter allow us to stay connected to old friends and far-away family members like never before. How else would I be in touch with the German exchange students who spent a year at my high school, my cousin teaching math to girls in Qatar, my continent-crossing sister? By writing a letter? Surely, you’ve never seen my handwriting.

But my desire to stay connected to people in my life means that I can’t do as Carr suggested and be selective in my following and friending, only aligning myself (virtually) with people who provide solid, useful information. It means that I’m opening myself up to dozens, if not hundreds, of posts about what my friends had for breakfast. And more than that, it means that I’m on the receiving end of a terrific amount of overshare.

I’m not alone: countless Web sites and Internet memes have been devoted to people who “suck” at social media. Aside from enthusiastic self-promoters and “app” addicts, the one group that seems most universally hated is the oversharers.

Don’t know what I’m talking about? Let’s take a little peek at your Facebook newsfeed, shall we? Your perpetually pregnant childhood friend posting about how “the morning sickness is so much worse than last time: I spent the morning throwing up!”? Overshare. Your lovelorn sorority sister who, after a date, posts: “Finally, a great date! Dinner and a movie and then …”? Overshare. All of the people you know who share break-ups, make-ups, potty stories, bedroom stories, and drunken pontifications? Over. Share.

Think of it this way: you run into an old acquaintance on the street. You haven’t seen each other in five years. Do you talk about your most recent trip to the bathroom, or your most recent trip to Bermuda? Unless you’re both gastroenterologists, I think you know what the answer should be. Use that mindset when posting to Facebook or Twitter: if you wouldn’t say it in person, it doesn’t belong on-line.

So please, folks: leave the poopy diapers, the bar brawls, and the deep moments of self introspection off your status messages and Twitter updates. These are things you should share with a select few, not the unwashed masses. It might not affect your career, but it’s guaranteed to affect your relationships with your social media contacts.

Today Is World AIDS Day

Image Credit: Flickr user Jayel Aheram

For many of us, the weeks between Thanksgiving and Christmas are spent in true holiday style. We sing Christmas carols; we brave the over-crowded malls (or we don’t, and we buy everything on Amazon.com); we spend time with our loved ones. Even for those of us who are not religious, the holiday season is a happy time of year that really gives us the opportunity to sit back and be grateful for all that we have—at least in the developed world.

It’s perhaps for that reason that World AIDS day falls right in the middle of the holiday season. The World AIDS Campaign began this annual December 1 tradition in 1988—at a time when AIDS and HIV were greatly misunderstood—to promote education and understanding about the disease. In the midst of the hustle and bustle of the holiday season, World AIDS Day reminds us that there are others out there who are not so fortunate nor as carefree as we. When everything around is decked out in red and green, World AIDS Day asks us to focus, just a little, on the red.

The World AIDS Campaign is not an ELISE client, nor do we work with any AIDS-focused charities. But many of our clients support technology that could help reduce the spread of the virus, and facilitate its diagnosis, in the developing world. The Lemelson Foundation, for instance, granted funds to PATH (Program for Appropriate Technology in Health) to continue their work in developing a female condom that could not only protect women in the developing world from unwanted pregnancies, but also reduce these women’s risks of contracting HIV or another sexually-transmitted disease. A few months ago, the NCIIA awarded top honors at their annual BMEidea competition to NanoLab (formerly Lab-on-a-Stick), a portable diagnostic tool that could allow for early diagnoses of diseases, such as HIV and AIDS, in remote or developing areas that did not have diagnostic lab facilities. And over the summer, the Games for Health Conference in Boston hosted a presentation on Pamoja Mtanni, a videogame about HIV prevention for Kenyan youth.

We are proud to help these amazing projects, and others, gain the notoriety they deserve—on World AIDS Day and every other day of the year.

Convenience vs. Authenticity: A Journalistic Debate

Last week, the Audit Bureau of Circulations made headlines when it reported that newspaper circulation across the country has dropped 10.6% in the past six months. This decline, the steepest in recent history, is no doubt symptomatic of the recession. However, the newly released statistics also cast light on the ongoing debate about the slow and steady disappearance of the newspaper industry.

With circulation down across the board, it’s hard to argue that people aren’t turning to the Internet for their news. Why pay when you can get it for free? But this makes sense on more than just an economic level: the collective attention span of society is about as long as a toddler’s, and it shortens as more technology becomes available to us. We are constantly in search of the next thing to obsess over, then forget about five minutes later. Lather, rinse, repeat. What better solution, in this quest for instant gratification, than the Internet? Heck, you can even watch TV for free. Still, as convenient as the Internet is for all things newsworthy, I can’t help but wonder if in our growing obsession with the Web, we are missing out on something. I recently had an experience that confirmed this for me.

A couple of weeks ago, ELISE took a field trip to the Philadelphia Inquirer building, where we were very fortunate to be given a tour of the premises, including the newsroom.

Formerly the home of the Inquirer’s printing press, the newsroom contained hundreds of desks, on which stood pre-millennium computers (gasp!) and stacks of old papers, precariously perched around writers working to make deadline. At first glance, it is madness. Yet we at ELISE couldn’t help but see beauty in the chaos. There was a liveliness to the space that came not only from the people inside, but the paper they were working to produce. A newspaper is a tangible entity. When you open it on Sunday morning, you know that physical labor has gone into its creation, from pressing to delivery. While it may be faster and more convenient to scan CNN’s homepage for the latest news, there is an undeniable authenticity to a paper publication that we ought not take for granted.

The other day, Chrissy wrote about the value of the traditional media kit in PR, and how while many agencies have opted to phase them out, here at ELISE, they will never go out of style. Why? Because they cultivate a personalized connection. Not to be sappy, but we use them because we care. Following this train of thought, where the Internet is ephemeral, newspapers and magazines are permanent, concrete. They represent the heart, soul, and a great deal of work by many people. Like many others, I question whether replacing them with Web copy would dilute their purpose. I prefer my paper hot off the presses, not popping off the screen. What do you think?

A Few Thoughts on the 2009 Global Creative Economy Convergence Summit

Innovation Philadelphia’s 2009 Global Creative Economy Convergence Summit (#GCECS2009, if you were following it on Twitter) was held yesterday and Monday, and I had the opportunity to represent ELISE at a number of panels and discussions over the course of the conference.

If you follow us on Twitter, you’ve probably already got an idea of what I saw and who I met. But for the rest of you, I wanted to give a few of my personal highlights from GCECS.

• Elizabeth Gilbert had a lot to say about what it meant to be fully employed as a creative person. Most interesting, she shared her belief that if you’re having trouble on one creative project, you should move to another. When plagued by serious writer’s block, Gilbert began to garden—creativity in a whole new way!
• I’d never heard the term “Shiny Penny Hell,” but I know I’ve been there: it’s the moment that you have a great idea and you have no idea what to do next, so you do nothing. Facilitators Julie Lenzer Kirk and Y. Renee Lewis led us through some exercises to un-block the creative stops—literally, with a block of wood.
• I think conferences need more Pecha Kucha. It’s the Twitter equivalent of Powerpoint presentations. Highlights from Monday’s session included Shift_Design’s gorgeous rainwater capture systems and the official introduction of the newly-launched Walkshed Philadelphia, which I plan on using all the time.
• Randall Kempner, of Lemelson-supported ANDE (Aspen Network of Development Entrepreneurs), gave a really engaging talk during lunch on Monday. During his talk, Randall said something that relates very much to the work we do here at ELISE: Entrepreneurs are everywhere, and we need to find ways of supporting them—especially the ones who are potentially driving social change.
• It was nice to see Doug Bellenger of PhindMe speaking about Mobile Technology (I first met him two years ago when I attended BlogPhiladelphia). Doug and his co-panelists had a lot to say about mobile browsing and apps, but my biggest takeaway was perhaps one of the more obvious: if you’re going to optimize your site for mobile Web, you can’t just do it for one type of mobile device. They’re all different, and what works for the iPhone may not work at all for a Blackberry.
• The session on crowdsourcing, moderated by Matthew Fisher of Night Kitchen Interactive, presented quite a few interesting points about this community-based method of problem solving and marketing. Because word of mouth travels more quickly than before, crowdsourcing enables movements to grow internationally and exponentially. And it also allows you to facilitate long-term, two-way relationships with the people you want to reach.
• Peter Shankman’s breakfast keynote yesterday was a re-focused version of the talk he gave two weeks ago at the Philly PRSA, this time talking more about social media in general than self-promotion. Key point he made that too many people don’t get: in social media, it’s up to you not to be stupid and post things you don’t want other people to see. Because at the end of the day, social media doesn’t exist. What exists is the ability to screw up for a larger audience in less time. Sound familiar?
• My key takeaway from the Mayors’ Roundtable on Sustainability? Conferences so focused on technology should make it easier for you to charge your laptop without having to leave the room. From following the #GCECS hashtag, though, it sounded like a really fascinating session!
• I’m really interested in issues of fair use and intellectual property, so attending the panel discussion focused on “Legal Challenges of Successful Entrepreneurship in an Internet Age” was a no-brainer. Most interesting to me was the idea that trademarks operate on a strictly “use it or lose it” policy: even if you file for protection, it’s up to you to make sure that you don’t let your brand slip through your fingers by inaction.
• I met some really interesting people at the lunchtime “Unconference Gab-Fest on Creativity,” including Rich Gretzinger of Human + Nature, which produces film and video for non-profit organizations, aimed at inspiring others to take action.
• My last panel at the conference focused on entrepreneurial journalism—Web-based outlets especially. Things got a little heated over philly.com Editor Chris Krewson’s thoughts on the future of the print industry (which basically amounted to: new business model needed), but he responded very thoughtfully to the audience’s concerns, and we had a great chat after the panel about how the rules of news changing so quickly that we were possibly headed into the wild, wild west: exciting, but untamed. Also on the panel, and great to talk to after, was Paul Schutt of Issue Media Group, which publishes (among other outlets) ELISE-favorite Keystone Edge.

I’m sure that I’ll go back to re-visit these ideas and other notes I took during GCECS, but that’s it for now. Were you there? Leave your thoughts in the comments!

Social Media’s Gray Area…Toeing the Line Between Invasion of Privacy and Just Being Smart About It

In this day and age, it seems like everybody and their mother has a Facebook, and for better or worse, I’m being literal. My mom hasn’t hopped on the bandwagon yet, but the point is, you can’t keep track of everyone who is out there in cyberspace reading your posted information, be it an admissions counselor, ex-boyfriend, or employer. In fact, just this week, Facebook’s user population nearly equaled that of the U.S.

Social media allows you to create an impression on people, and just as with face-to-face interactions, you would like the impression to be a good one. This freedom of expression that the Internet equips us with, through sites like Twitter, Facebook, personal blogs and even professional networking sites such as LinkedIn—while it is certainly liberating, can also be dangerous if you aren’t careful (read: you don’t use common sense). In the last few years, social media has evolved from a largely personal tool for connecting with friends, new and old, to a universe in which it is uncommon for a major public figure, large corporation, or maybe your average socially conscious PR firm not to have a Twitter account. Social media is everywhere, and like Geico’s latest advertising campaign, the little money stack with eyes,  it’s watching you.

With this in mind, a few weeks ago I read an article on the dangers of social media for your career, and it struck a chord with me. We all have moments when we are frustrated with life, but there is something to be said for not airing dirty laundry in public. For instance, if you happen to follow the company Twitter, or are Facebook friends with your co-workers, it’s probably not the best idea to publicly complain about your job. When I see my friends do this, I cringe in discomfort for them. Even law enforcement uses Facebook these days, though they won’t be writing on your wall. Just the other week, an annual party at my alma mater was broken up by the police after they read details of it on a Facebook event page.

While some might consider this an invasion of privacy, if it’s out there, someone will find it. Hear me now, people, and thank me later. Use the old rule of thumb… If you wouldn’t want your mother to see it, read it, or hear about it, then don’t post it, because like I said at the beginning, chances of that are increasing.

Social media is meant to help you, not hurt you. Freedom of expression is one of the many great things about our wonderful country, but a little self-censoring never hurt anyone (and I bet it never lost anyone their job either).

Fair Use, Attribution and the Quote

Way back when, in the days before the Internet, television and even radio, people got their news from newspapers. And if old movies set in these older times are to be believed, families and friends would sometimes sit around and read the news aloud to one another, and then, perhaps, discuss it.

This, folks, was the proto-blog.

Think about it. Many blog posts that surround a news story begin with a quote from or summary about the source material, including a link to the original, and then offer their own analysis or insight into the facts. Some blogs report the news, sure—but because there are very few blogs that can support a full-time research staff, most of what they can offer is a quick update on the news of the day, complete with a link back to the source material, and a bit of commentary or opinion. With a few exceptions, blogs are not trying to replace traditional reporting, nor is it likely that they ever will. There’s really no replacement for a traditional newsroom. At least not yet.

Unfortunately, that’s not an opinion traditional media shares these days. From Rupert Murdoch’s accusations against Google (which, by the way, re-directs users who happen upon a Wall Street Journal article to the Wall Street Journal Web site) to the Associated Press’s takedown request issued against the Drudge Retort for “copyright infringement” even though correct attribution was provided in the questionable passages, it’s becoming obvious that traditional media’s discomfort with on-line content providers stems from misunderstanding the nature and language of the Internet. It’s not about stealing; it’s about sharing, via short quotes and hyperlinks that direct both Web traffic and attention to the full story.

But sharing seems to be what the Associated Press, News Corp., and others are trying to fight. Now there’s speculation amongst bloggers I know that even citing an article’s headline may soon be met with hefty fines, and the Associated Press is already charging large sums for small quotes (even if they’re in the public domain), in conjunction with widespread efforts to find any un-paid-for quotes from the outlet’s articles. Attribution or not, the stance is clear: fair use, which has been a part of U.S. copyright law since 1976 and understood the way we define it today since 1841, doesn’t matter. Fair is fair—but only at $2.50 a word.

I love newspapers and traditional reporting and every time that closure rumors begin to circulate, it makes me sad. And I’m as aware as the next person that providing their content for free for so long is part of the reason they got into trouble in the first place. But there has to be a way for major news providers to monetize their sites without coming down on the very people who read their content and think it’s worth sharing. Mark Cuban has several solutions that don’t use the words “copyright violation” or “lawsuit” even once.

Because if blogs that quote and discuss the news are going to get accused of copyright violations, who’s to say that people who quote and discuss the news at home or work or when out with friends won’t eventually have to pay the fines as well? Trying to prevent plagiarism and protect copyrights is a noble effort. Trying to halt conversation is not.