Now, what's tweeting done to journalism

If you're a tweeting Malaysian, chances are you may have been following the many streams from various journalists and news organisations tweeting updates from the happenings at the Perak State Legislative Assembly.



Now, in the era of the internet, the blog and the news site, live updates are not something entirely new. I remember accessing my mobile and refreshing every 15 minutes to see the latest results during the March 8 (2008) elections. But Twitter is something altogether different. Here's why I think so:

Too fast for filtering?
It's instant. It's spontaneous. And with a 140-character count, the reporting is straight and to-the-point. With the speed the live tweets are sent out, and the tone they result in, I suspect a lot less filtering is happening.

Yes, live updates on popular news websites are fast, but I bet you there's a couple of eyes looking at those updates before they go live.

I doubt that @edgemy has any similar process where the journalist needs to get clearance from his / her editor to post a tweet. What we get is unfiltered reporting straight from the source.

These are real people reporting
The Star's Deputy Executive Editor Wong Sai Wan (@saiwanstar) made a good point. He tweeted: "...now people realise we who write are real people" and I can't agree more. Last year's debates over the freedom of our press often cast the newspapers and media as monolithic organisations that were pro-government.

But when journalists Twitter, you'd realise that journalists are real people who have feelings, opinions and ethics. Most importantly, they are right there on location.

Follow @melodysong you won't see just a nameless entity covering a potentially dangerous situation. You'll see a very brave journalist who's put herself on the line to report the truth. So much so people actually care about her safety.

The conversation ripple
The third thing that's happening to reporting thanks to Twitter is the conversation ripple that's forming. Okay, I invented that term. But what I mean is this:

Journalist A tweets. Person B responds. Person C retweets. Person D follows Journalist A because he saw Person B's response. Then Person D retweets.

Multiply this X 100 times and see messages fly back and fourth. If the event was #hashtagged, you'd have a pretty good gauge of sentiment (at least among geeks).

Now, this is probably no different from what happens at the mamak stall when you discuss the front page of the newspaper with your friends. But virtually, think of it as 1,000 people crowding around the same table, and the conversation doesn't happen the next day but as it happens.

I'm not @melodysong, and I don't know what it feels like to be out in the field reporting and getting live feedback from hundreds of voices, but I'm pretty sure it's different from those days of just going out and covering a story then coming back to file it.

Normal people can report too
Goes without saying, just like with blogs - even if you don't consider yourself a journalist, there's nothing stopping you from tweeting what you see right in front of you.

As a bystander in this industry, I'm pretty excited to see where this is all heading. As a citizen of the country, I'm hoping this will mean more transparency and accurate reporting in our country.

The PM's exclusive content: Marketing the wrong thing?

There was a story that ran in The Star today where our PM encouraged the people to check his blog regularly for 'exclusive content.'

I've got a question. What does our dear PM mean when he say's 'exclusive content'?

Is he talking about some exclusive wallpapers featuring himself? Behind-the-scenes videos? 'The making of' videos? What 'exclusive content'?

He says its exclusive content on coming events. Okay, so it sounds like its actually useful information. That's more troubling.

The issue here is: is it right for the nation's leader to have exclusive content just for the 59% of Malaysians on the internet - and even then, only the few - who may be visiting his website?

Shouldn't he be sending the message out to all Malaysians through as many channels as possible?

No, I don't believe 'exclusive content' is for the PM. I also don't believe a new logo will actually add any 'fresh perspectives' (read here).

PR people and bloggers: why engage in the first place?

First off, I'd like to remind you that I've got a disclaimer somewhere on this blog that anything and everything posted here is solely my opinion. This isn't work related, and does not reflect my employer's opinion. It doesn't even reflect my fellow PR colleagues opinion. Any similarities in opinion is purely coincidental.

Now that we've got that out of the way, I wanted to latch on to a timely post by Shaolintiger last week to put forward some thoughts on the matter of PR people engaging bloggers in Malaysia. And problems that subsequently ensue.

I believe the crux of the issue is that there is still largely misunderstanding on both sides to this core question: "What's the point of engagement?"

To the PR person:

It's no big secret that more and more clients today are asking agencies about engaging the blogosphere, twit-o-sphere or whatever "-sphere" you can think of.

Most clients don't understand social media, and I can't help but think the responsibility falls squarely on the agency to educate them. Both PR people and clients need to understand what social / peer media can and cannot do. Expectations, goals and objectives of any kind of engagement needs to be set right.

What's your goal in engaging the blogger? So that they can write a positive "write-up" about your client's products / services? If so, I'd say paying for the advertorial is probably the best way to go.

Let me give you an alternative viewpoint: what if your engagement with the social / peer media isn't so you can see positive blogposts, but so you can involve yourself and your brand in the conversation that's going all around you regardless of whether you take part or not, and add value?

What if the objective of holding a blogger event is to listen to what bloggers have to say about your product rather than having them go home and re-printing your press release?

Social media is about the conversation. Companies can participate, or they can pay some money and take an ad. Like what an editor once told me.

My humble advice is don't think the blogger owes you anything just because they attended your event. The onus is on you, the company and the PR person advising the company, to make sure what you've got to tell the blogger is worth the blogger re-telling, if coverage is your goal.

To the blogger:

Here's what PR people can do: pre-release scoops, direct contact with some top people (CEOs?), connect you to in-depth discussions with experts from client companies, get you product samples, previews of upcoming products, and ensure your feedback gets listened to and acted upon.

Here's what PR people don't do (generally): place advertorials or do advertising. This function is the media-buying agency, whom the client pays to insert advertisements / advertorials in the right places.

PR people shouldn't be out there to get free publicity. Many are (I won't deny that). But they shouldn't be. Bang them on their head if they try that stunt on you.

PR people are not out there to con you so that you write good things on your blogs about their clients, for free. If their goal is deception, they should be hung out to dry and rightly so.

PR people are there to facilitate conversations between a company and its interested audiences.

If you're a blogger who's heard about the upcoming cool new phone and think its worth your time and space to blog about it, the PR person is your best bet to get you that hands-on with the device before its even launched.

If you have a grouse against a certain company, the PR person is the person that should be listening and taking the feedback back to the company and making sure there's follow-up. Even if its to tell you they can't do anything about it.

If you're not interested, tell them and the PR person should go away.

This doesn't mean clients shouldn't advertise on your blogs and pay PR people to get free publicity. Advertising still exists and will continue to exist. It just isn't the purview of the PR agency. Rather, the right people who should be placing advertisements on your blogs are media buying agencies who might work for the same client as the PR person. Of course, this doesn't stop you from proposing an advertising package to the PR person you're working with if you think its something that will add value to the client.

So what's the root of the problem?

I can't help but think its the PR community's fault for bringing this onto ourselves in the first place by setting expectations wrongly when working with the blogosphere.

ShaolinTiger is right when he says:

...the sooner YOU poorly informed PR hacks educate yourselves the sooner you will reap real benefits from engaging bloggers and forming relationships with them.

The key word is understand. Social media is not as simple as the one event = 8 write-ups formula many 'PR' agencies peddle to clients. On second thought, even your traditional media isn't as simple as that. We could all do with a little more thinking, research, and just asking ourselves: "Would I do this to myself if I was on the other end of the stick?"

Please feel free to discuss if you've something to add. Comments welcome.

Yes, Pak Lah, the direct membership to BN is a good move...

I'm not one for much political discourse, but I just wanted to express my support for Pak Lah's idea of creating open membership direct to BN.

Unlike what most of the people in the news reports say, I don't see this as a threat to the identity of any one party within BN. I mean, I could still join MCA if I wanted to join a Chinese party within BN. But giving people the choice of direct membership into BN is a great way of gauging support for non-racial politics (something we suspect a lot of the new generation is into) and remaining relevant to that crowd without jeopardising the identities of the component parties.

Let's try this out okay, guys? And no, this doesn't mean I would like to join BN.

Thought I'd share...

So yesterday night was kind of the first time I was gallivanting outside of KLCC with a workable camera (on my N95), and so this is kind of the first photograph I'm snapping of KLCC at night since it was built.



Awesome building, right?

Elections Brand Plagiarism

There's a sub-culture in urban states (like the US and even here in Kuala Lumpur) called "Brand Plagiarism or Logo Culture" where you take the logo of a known brand and turn it into your own message.

Some brand-guardians think this is flattery, others are mortified by such butchery of their brands.

I'm just wondering how Celcom is feeling right now:



Was driving past this yesterday night. They even used the bird symbol! LoL!

Worth Surfing: malaysiavotes.com

For all of you interested in following the Malaysian Elections through an independent news site that's not biased to either side, you really should check out www.malaysiavotes.com.



The people running this site were journalists from The Edge and an ex-colleague of mine (who happened to be their colleagues in The Edge) has vouched for them. Personally, I've worked with at least one of them in the past (part of my job) and they are credible, intelligent and decent people so I'd vouch for them too.

Hooray for Online Journalism!

Malaysia's very own Internet Elections portal

So, what sort of change does the Internet bring to elections? Would it affect Malaysia? We'll know in a couple of weeks, I guess.

There was a really good article from ReadWriteWeb I read that characterised how the Internet would change the nature of electoral campaigning and allow candidates to get closer, more directly engaged, with their audiences. Case in point:

• Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John McCain and the other US candidates all have Facebook profiles & groups.
• YouTube partnered CNN to host presidential debates on its Video Service.
• At least Barack Obama & Hillary Clinton have blogs. Many more campaign workers have blogs.

But that's not all. Just run a Yahoo! search and you'll find countless forums, blogs and sites that support discussion and debate on the US Elections.

Well, the good news is, us Malaysians aren't too far behind. Beyond the political bloggers / watchers in our country, I'd like to point out that leading Bahasa Melayu daily Harian Metro has launched its own elections site entitled, aptly, "PilihanRaya 2008."


Harian Metro's Pilihan Raya 2008 site.

What really surprises me with this site is the functionality built in. You can not only get the latest news and information for the General Elections, but also vote in the on-going poll, or add your own comment.


Comments are on the left side of the screen.

I cannot stress how important a factor it is to allow people to comment. What's an election if we don't allow people to debate? The simple ability to comment makes this platform more than just a web-site. It'd be interesting to see the discussions (and... uh... moderation?) that'll go on on the site.

This is pretty ground-breaking stuff, especially coming from an established newspaper. I'm personally wondering if we'll see a similar site from NST the next couple of days to cover off the English-speaking audience.

Meanwhile, kudos to Harian Metro and its online team. Exciting stuff.

Patroitism in the single dimension

No one may have joined him in his cries for "Merdeka" yesterday at Parliament, but Lim Kit Siang's point didn't go unheard. A story published in the New Straits Times today said:

CRIES of "Merdeka" rang seven times through parliament yesterday as Lim Kit Siang tried to prove a point on patriotism.

NST says "tried." I say, point well taken.

Even as Malayan Peninsula begins its next 50 years of independence, the concept of patroitism still takes on a one-dimensional perspective.

For most Malaysian school-children, myself included, singing patroitic songs is almost a guaranteed childhood experience. I remember standing under the hot sun singing "Malaysia Berjaya" and "Demi Negara"at a bunch of teachers sitting in the shade.

Of course, in secondary school it became "Wawasan 2020" and a couple of other songs that I can't recall.

Someone believed that singing Patroitic songs would make us more patroitic. Oh, and we were taught that when such songs were sung, we'd need to stand up erect to show our patroitism.

Veteran actor-director Jo Kukathas once poked fun in her parody "Atomic Jaya", stating that Malaysian's could invent a new patroitic song every time they had something to hide or had a cause they needed to rally people around.

But patroitism is more than just a song and dance. Sure, it's easy to get people to say "we love our nation" and wear the Malaysian flag with "pride" but that's as far as it usually goes.

Not many Malaysians are too concerned about our nation and that shows from the lack of interested voters. A paltry 12 million voters in the last election showed just how much people cared about our Nation's future.

This is not good for the country. If we want to be Malaysians, we need to start caring about issues, challenging the status quo if it isn't right and ensuring that the appointed public officials are doing their job.

It's time to vote. And vote intelligently.