Surfette

A linking meritocracy of your own

Jay Rosen and I have collaborated on Pressthink's response to Halley Suitt's challenge in "Fourteen New Voices: A Reply to Halley's Comment." I copy the piece below with the usual disclaimer that this post is simply a record of my writing--I welcome your comments over at Pressthink. --LS

-----Excerpted from Jay Rosen's Pressthink: Fourteen New Voices: A Reply to Halley's Comment

A linking meritocracy of your own
by Lisa Stone

Did we really love "Lucy"? Or did we just watch her because that's all that was on TV?

My money's on the latter. That's why I'm happy to participate in Halley Suitt's challenge to promote ten voices. It's time the most-trafficked blogs in the 'sphere launched a couple hundred or so blog-cable channels with content and links that beef up the programming mix.

Why do I have this opinion? Because in the past year, I've spent a lot of time surfing the long tail of the blogosphere, first for the Los Angeles Times, then for Law.com and most recently for Knight Ridder Digital. In each case, my assignment was to assess and report back on a diverse cross-section of blogs on the subjects of politics, law and NASCAR.

This was a bigger challenge than I originally anticipated, because I was limited by the quality of my search techniques and the time I had to invest in those searches on deadline. I found I could rely on services such as Technorati, Feedster and Truth Laid Bear, but only to a certain extent.

Why?

Because the same bloggers kept popping up on my searches. I found it surprisingly challenging to extend my appreciation of the blogosphere beyond a list of the usual suspects in any subject or category—even when I scoured blogrolls.

My time paid off. And, yes, on the way I discovered the dregs, the blogging equivalents of QVC and Falcon Crest re-runs I won't even watch with Spanish voiceovers. I hit paydirt too, stumbling across Baldilocks and Carolyn Elefant and Kathy’s Pit Stop.

But it was work—and what about the blogs I missed? What about the casual user who isn't paid to be, well, a surfette? This experience is why I find questions by Suitt and Jeneane Sessums so important. This experience is why it was easier than it should have been for Kevin Drum to miss the kazillions of bloghers who have since chewed his, er, lunch.

Why do I value this push for diversity in blogrolls? It's purely selfish: I have to be able to find quality blogs in order to read them and to link them--not just for my day job, but to feed my own brain. The better (read: more diverse) your blogroll, the smarter and happier this reader is. That's why my first response to Halley's comment at Harvard was to out the brainstorm I'd already begun with Elisa Camahort to hold a Bloghercon-ference.

I'm also happy to recommend the ten bloggers I review below--one more way to support other bloggers and help you feed a meritocracy of your own. Because the media we consume can only be as good as the media we demand. In Blogworld, the media we demand is the media we're willing to hunt down and link.

So while sometimes I still do love Lucy, I'll never be a one-woman blogger. I need to learn from the entire blogosphere. And as bloggerdom evolves, si Dios quiere, so will what I read--and recommend.

Personally, I'm not going to be satisfied with less than the whole picture. Otherwise, I'd still be parked in front of my TV.

So here's our interpretation of #5 from above. Here are 14 capsule reviews of bloggers you may not know, but should.

Blackfeminism.org
Body and Soul
emdashes
Good Reputation Sleeping
Jordon Cooper
Jenny D.
Kathy's Pit Stop
Memo
Ranting Profs
Regret the error
The Sassy Lawyer's Journal
Sepia Mutiny
Ypulse

Reviews continue below...

Bloghercon, Summer 2005: One letter, a world of perspective

I am deep in listening mode, reading every thread I can find about the opportunity presented by a global conference for women bloggers. As I continue to take some days off from posting (primarily to read all of your writings and emails instead), I want to confirm two things:

(1) This summer's conference is called Bloghercon.

Bloghercon is coming to an as-yet-unannounced location in Summer 2005, along with an as-yet-unlaunched Web entity for everyone's participation and enjoyment. Dave Winer politely requested that I change the name to something that is less like his brainchild, Bloggercon. Here's what I think:

One little letter delivers a world of perspective.

That's the whole point. So for now it's Bloghercon, with the caveat that when the conference convenes, the community may well come up with a name they like better. Great--let's find out.

(2) Bloghercon is pro-women. Not anti-men.

"Bloghercon [i]s a way of expanding the network, not making it more inclusive. It's a way for women who blog to connect, not a way to disconnect with men who blog. In fact, the upshot could be to establish even more connections to the blogging community in general."                    -- Sylvia Paull from a comment she left here

This has been and is my message and Elisa Camahort's message all along.

The outpouring of interest across the Web has convinced me that the time has come for Bloghercon, a global forum devoted to the work and experiences of women bloggers--an event (real and virtual) designed to make it easier for Web users to find women's voices.

With that, I'm off to read again. More soon.

-------

Related posts (a too-limited list! Please keep adding yours to the comments/trackbacks--unfortunately the realities of the day job are forcing me to keep this list shorter than I'd like):

“Bloghercon 2005: Is this the way to run with Halley's Comment?” By Lisa Stone

“Bloghercon: Now the cat can really be let out of the bag” By Elisa Camahort

“Should Bloghercon be open to men?” By Lisa Stone

"Some Bloghercon reaction begs for clarification" By Elisa Camahort

More:

Burningbird (See comments)

Elisa Camahort (one of many posts)

Jude Nagurney Camwell (An example of the Bloghercon spirit in action)

Halley’s Comment    

Charlene Li (Also see comments by Adverblog and Search Gal)

Susan Mernit

Sylvia Paull

Elaine Riggs

Uncle Sam’s Cabin

Nancy White (one of many posts)

Technorati Tags: Bloghercon, women, blogging, blogs

Should Bloghercon be open to men?

Here's my answer to this question. I say yes, men are welcome. Eleanor Kruszewski disagrees beautifully with me here. Please vote at the bottom of this post. Thanks.--LS 

Question: Should Bloghercon be open to men?

Answer (short): Yes.

Answer (long): Yes. I’d like to open Bloghercon to anyone who wants to learn more about what women are doing across the entire blogging spectrum, from work to play. I agree with the last sentence of Sylvia Paull's post . (Hat-tip to the unsung: I don't think this idea is new--I hear we're in a long line of women who have tried this concept.)

I’m also going to answer Dave Winer’s questions below, but as they beg questions of the DNA of Bloghercon, I’ll briefly digress.

Why Bloghercon? Here, courtesy of a private email I received from an enthusiast this week, is why I suggested Bloghercon, and why anyone who shares this interest—female, male, cat, dog, kitchen sink--should attend:

"The guys all know each other, but we don’t...What I want to get out of it [Bloghercon]? More leads to interesting women so that I can follow their writings and mention them in my blog."

– Source: Charlene Li, via private email to Surfette

Bingo.

It is often said that the good blogs get read, that's why they're in the Technorati Top 100. I suggest Bloghercon because we have to be able to find quality bloggers in order to read them and to link them. Bloghercon fills a niche unmet by Technorati, Feedster or Truth Laid Bear. Bloghercon is one more tool to support and feed the meritocracy.

Here’s what I’m on about: These sites measure and recommend blogs at least partially based upon blog traffic and/or the quantity of links from other blogs (this is a somewhat gross generalization; please visit these sites for a complete explanation). To be sure, links and traffic denote one type of popularity. But the degree to which blogs are linked or trafficked is not always a harbinger of quality or relevance.

At least not to me, the reader. Why do I have this opinion? Because in the past year, I've spent a lot of time surfing the long tail of the blogosphere, first for the Los Angeles Times, then for Law.com and most recently for Knight Ridder Digital. In each case, my assignment was to assess and report back on as diverse a cross-section as possible of blogs on the subjects of politics, law and NASCAR.

In each case, my editors said, “What’s really going on out there?” Answering this question was a challenge because I was limited by the quality of my search techniques and the time I had to invest in those searches on deadline. I found I could rely on services such as Technorati, Feedster and Truth Laid Bear, but only to a certain extent. Why? Because the same bloggers kept popping up on my searches. I found it surprisingly challenging to extend one’s appreciation of the blogosphere beyond a list of the usual suspects in any individual subject/category—even when I scoured to blogrolls.

My time paid off. I still found Baldilocks and Carolyn Elefant and Kathy’s Pit Stop. But it was work—and what about the blogs I missed?  What about the casual user who isn't paid to be, well, a surfette? This experience is why I find Jeneane Sessums’ question so important. This experience is why it was easier than it should have been for Kevin Drum to miss the kazillions of bloghers who have since chewed his, er, lunch.

I’ll repeat: I submit that you have to be able to find blogs in order to read them and to link them. Bloghercon is one more tool to support and feed the meritocracy.

Just like Bloggercon, Dave Winer's brainchild, which I attended last November. I enjoyed myself. I learned a lot there. And I grew my own personal network there, too: I met Jay Rosen of Pressthink and I ended up guest-blogging for him a few times. Voila, connection made. There were some terrific women there -- Rebecca MacKinnon, Chris Nolan, Susan Mernit, Elisa Camahort, many others I didn't get to meet--but it was mostly men, for whatever reason, both attending and facilitating. I see Bloghercon as an opportunity to extend the experience to another facet of the blogging community.

Dave Winer’s questions. I also want to directly address Dave's questions here, because they're important. These are my opinions, not those of colleagues-in-concept (Elisa Camahort et al.) whom I am sure will chime in if they disagree. These bullets are Dave's questions:

• "Will there be male discussion leaders?"

Don't know yet. This is a forum devoted to discussing the work and experiences of women bloggers, so I would presume the grand majority, if not all, will be women. Speaking of which, email me with suggestions, please!

• "Will men be allowed to speak without being ridiculed?"

Let me be clear: I recommend that asshats of all genders who ridicule anyone be asked to leave. Disagreement’s one thing, ridicule’s another. I think we need plenty of community feedback on discussion guidelines and dedicated moderators in each room to promote these guidelines and further the subject of discussion: women bloggers. So I suppose the correct answer is an if:then string--If attendees [be they women/men/kitchen sink] do not adhere to the discussion guidelines, then, yup, they will risk expulsion (and, it's likely, ex post facto) ridicule. If they do adhere to the discussion guidelines, they won’t.

• "Will women who say sexist things about men (yes, there are plenty of those) be challenged, or will people who disagree be shouted down? In other words, how "her" is this going to be? And why?"

Please see my comments above and here: “Bloghercon 2005: Is this the way to run with Halley’s Comment?” In other words, I think you can expect this conference to be plenty “her” –after all, Bloghercon is about women bloggers and creating a network to discuss and extend their work and interests. It’s about interpersonal networking to pursue those goals. However, IMHO Bloghercon is not about women vs. men. IMHO that's missing the point.

In summary, if I had to write a tagline for Bloghercon, it would be "Where women are blogging". Bloghercon is a big tent. Bloghercon is designed as a global idea exchange for and about women bloggers, who will make it what they will. I would never attempt to articulate why so many women are interested in Bloghercon--they're saying it for themselves. Here’s a sampler:

Burningbird (See comments)

Elisa Camahort (one of many posts)

Jude Nagurney Camwell (An example of the Bloghercon spirit in action)

Halley’s Comment

Charlene Li (Also see comments by Adverblog and Search Gal)

Susan Mernit

Sylvia Paull

Elaine Riggs

Uncle Sam’s Cabin

Nancy White (one of many posts)

Special mention: Eleanor Kruszewski who disagrees with me over whether men should be invited.

Please weigh in women – who do you want at Bloghercon?

-----

Technorati Tags: Bloghercon, women, blogging, blogs

Tag: Bloghercon

Bloghercon 2005 has elicited a steady flow of interested emails and posts today. Here's how to help other bloggers find your post on Bloghercon:

(1)Technorati tags, courtesy of Elisa Camahort and Nancy White. Copy these tags into the top or bottom of your post to include it in Technorati search results:

Technorati Tags: Bloghercon, women, blogging, blogs

More on Technorati tags

(2) De.lici.ous bookmarks, courtesy of Nancy White:

http://del.icio.us/choconancy/Bloghercon

Categories: bloghercon, women, blogging

More about the de.lici.ous social bookmarks manager.

Judge takes Apple's side: I don't care if you're a blogger or a journo, cough up your sources

As posted on Legal Blog Watch earlier. I rarely cross over from Legal Blog Watch to Surfette, but in this case it seems essential. What else should we read? Please post recommendations here -- LS

Apple v. Does: Judge says nobody (blogger or journalist) can publish third-party info provided by lawbreakers

Cough up your sources, Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge James Kleinberg told three bloggers today. According to Kleinberg, "no one has the right to publish information that could have been provided only by someone breaking the law," reports The AP's Rachel Konrad.

Kleinberg ruled in the Apple Computer, Inc. case that Monish Bhatia, Jason O'Grady and a third blogger with the pseudonym Kasper Jade were not protected by the First Amendment when they published trade secrets obtained from third parties about an unreleased Apple product code-named "Asteroid."

Eugene Volokh says this ruling circumvents the Bloggers vs. Journalists quagmire completely. He writes:

"The judge did not deal with any possible subpoenas against the bloggers. He thus didn't decide whether bloggers are entitled to be treated the same as other journalists, but concluded that in any event the subpoena against the service provider -- which the service provider isn't contesting -- is constitutionally permissible.

"The judge did, however, signal that he isn't fond of third parties posting illegally leaked trade secret, analogizing them to "fences" of stolen information. I have argued that the First Amendment bars imposing trade secret liability on third parties, such as newspapers or Web sites, see pp. 739-48 of this article, but it sounds like the judge disagrees."

Jurispundit agrees, writing that "Judge Kleinberg dodged the blogger/journalist bullet altogether. The gist of the opinion is such: The dissemination of the information was illegal, and the Shield Law [*] does not protect anyone, whether it be journalist or blogger, from such activity. From the opinion:

"Based on [the language of the shield law] and the facts presented, it is far from clear that Mr. O'Grady qualifies for relief from the subpoena on the grounds advanced. Whether he fits the definition of a journalist, reporter, blogger, or anything else need not be decided at this juncture for this fundamental reason: there is no license conferred on anyone to violate criminal laws."

* For more on the California Shield Law, read Michelle Malkin on The Royal Flush.

All reports anticipate an appeal, for which the Electronic Frontier Foundation has been advocating. The EFF page on the case states,

"EFF opposes Apple's discovery because the confidentiality of the media's sources and unpublished information are critical means for journalists of all stripes to acquire information and communicate it to the public. Because today's online journalists frequently depend on confidential sources to gather material, their ability to promise confidentiality is essential to maintaining the strength of independent media. Furthermore, the protections required by the First Amendment are necessary regardless of whether the journalist uses a third party for communications."Full story, Case Summary, The Ruling

Elisa Camahort: "Now the [BlogHerCon] cat can really be let out of the bag"

In her post "Now the cat can really be let out of the bag," my colleague-in-concept Elisa Camahort evangelizes Bloghercon, bringing us up to speed on her conversations with folks like Mary Hodder, Sylvia Paull, Eleanor Krusewski and Jory des Jardins. Hat-tip to Sylvia Paull for first blogging this idea!

The Queen Bee, as Camahort is known in some circles, has been working on a Bloghercon community manifesto designed to help us dig deep into essential questions of philosophy and strategy. She's produced a must-read post--here's a taster:

"Men, as well as women, have been asking, "Where are the women?" And we have been responding...we're right here. That the same question is being asked now as was asked one year ago or two years ago is frustrating, but the real question is: what, if anything, do women bloggers want to do about it? [Note: latter emphasis added-LS]

There's room in Bloghercon for philosophical discussion on questions like:

-Is blogging genderless? If you didn't know a blogger's name, could you always tell their gender? And does it matter?
-If, as Shelley [See Burningbird--LS] claims, links are the powerful talisman of the male blogger, and to women sometimes a link is just a link, then what do women want to get out of blogging?
-How can such a new medium already have an "old boy's club"? Or is this just a continuation of an existing club? Does certain content make a woman an acceptable mascot for that club, while other kinds of expression will keep us out?
-Do women marginalize themselves without any help from men? What drives us to do that?

Even more importantly, Lisa and I want to have a Bloghercon to take action:

-Do we care if there is and old boy's club-does it affect us? Do we want to be part of that club? Do we want to change the club?
-If we care, then how can women promote women, without being dismissed as a sewing circle? And should we? Is creating a women's network the answer, or do we really seek gender-transparency?
-Where are the other barriers? And what are we trying to break through those barriers to do?
-What would be measurable success? If we had a Bloghercon again in a year what would cause us to pat ourselves on the back and say "job well done"?" Much more here.

So, I repeat, do you want Bloghercon? If so, why and how? Please tell Elisa here and/or add your comments below. She and I are getting together Sunday at our favorite midway cafe to brainstorm further...

-----

Technorati Tags: Bloghercon, women, blogging, blogs

Google gets that women control 83 percent of household spending

Do $ome good on International Women's Day.

Thanks Google.

Bloghercon 2005: Is this the way to run with Halley's Comment?

Shall we up the ante and build a global gathering place, online and off, virtual and real, for women bloggers: Bloghercon 2005? (Update: Please also read "Should Bloghercon be open to men?" posted 3.14.05)

I'll stop clapping for Halley Suitt's challenge long enough to accept. (Normally I'd push back on box-checking for race and gender--I'm the token-single-mom too often and it rubs--but posts by Rebecca MacKinnon and Burningbird and Jeneane Sessum have convinced me to skip it for now.)

Instead I suggest we up the ante with Bloghercon. (Yes, it's a wordplay on Bloggercon. More on that three-year tradition in a minute.)

Here's why: If we can agree that it's important for Web users to be exposed to more than one woman blogger, then you tell me...

• Do we need a global stage where women bloggers can have a conversation by, for and about our individual work, and share it with anyone who's interested?
• Would we benefit from creating a meeting place (virtual and actual) where we can pursue the diverse agendas, policies, ideas, journalism, brainstorming, anger, humor and <insert infinite subject loop here> that are not getting [enough] air time in any medium worldwide?

My answer to both questions is yes. I submit that women bloggers deserve Bloghercon, based on the events of the past month. I don't just mean reacting to what he said, what he wrote and the data behind what she's on about, important conversations all.

No, I'm talking about a conference that enables women bloggers to tesseract to proactive social and intellectual networking with each other. Women bloggers have much more enticing sashimi to gobble than Summers and Drum--politically, economically, socially and personally. For example, let's examine what she blogged about women on seven continents, her comments on a facet of family law, her syllabus of political bloggers, what she and she see coming in Elections 2006 and 2008, her red-alert about our rights as bloggers and what she said a television commentator called us.

Elisa Camahort (update: read her thoughtful post here) and I have had long talks on the subject of a conference agenda, and I'm eager to watch her post some of her excellent thoughts on the subject, now that the idea is in play. I'm also thankful to Law.com chief editrix Jennifer Collins for her advice--she suggested changing the original brainstorm--"Bloggirlcon"--to "Bloghercon," a massive improvement.

But that's getting ahead of ourselves. First, let's road-test the idea and see if it adheres to Trey Goesh's rules. He writes:

"If you want it done, you can do it yourself. If you need help, ask. If the project is cool enough, you'll get the support. If you don't get the support, your project probably isn't as neat as you thought it was."

So: Do you want Bloghercon? And, if so, why and how? As Nancy White recently blogged, "For me, the bottom line of community is how each community defines that for itself."

What do you think?

----

Update: Further thoughts and definitions on Bloghercon. I'll use this space to try to communicate some of the conversations I've been having with people on their blogs. I welcome any feedback, improvements and updates here.

Issue: Childcare, bias toward women with children

Over at Uncle Sam's Cabin, Cabin Master writes:

"TulipGirl's Women's Day post (it was yesterday) makes this observation about the American church, "I'’ve seen such a strong desire to rebuild the family and give honor to mothers, that those who are not married especially (but also those who are married but do not have children) are in a sort of limbo." She asks, "...is the church really showing respect to women, if we are subtly snubbing our single and childless friends?" So many discussions about women in the church seem to assume that the women being discussed are all married with children. It was really starting to annoy me. I'm glad some one else noticed..." More here.

I posted this response:

"Bingo. I think our solution's in the Bloghercon format. Here's why:

"One of the first issues Elisa Camahort (Queen of the Worker Bees) and I discussed was our interest in a Bloghercon conversation on how to live the blogging lifestyle without, well, going completely insane.

"We spent a lot of time talking about the opportunity this particular conversation has to embrace the value of private life for everywoman, without the usual embedded value judgements (e.g. toward kids, spouses, etc).

"But here's the kicker: Our goal is not to control the discussion at Bloghercon. Our goal is to create the world stage where everyone can let 'er rip. Which means that Bloghercon requires a format in which women have the opportunity to initiate and/or participate in any conversation they want to.

"So if a group of women wants to split off to discuss their particular shared scenario in blogging life--from carpal tunnel to Internet access to, yes, children--then so be it. Some conversations will need rooms, others tables."

Next I realized I'd neglected to answer the initial question, will childcare be available at Bloghercon. I wrote:

"We don't know enough yet to say. What do you think we should do?"

-----

Technorati Tags: Bloghercon, women, blogging, blogs

NYTD's Len Apcar on About.com acquisition

Len Apcar, editor in chief of New York Times Digital, just made these comments to the Harvard/Nieman Foundation "Whose News?"  conference about the Times' acquisition of About.com:

"I’m ecstatic we bought the times because it shows The New York Times is not a newspaper company. Marketwatch, About, Slate say we are starved for pageviews, we need a growth engine because we cannot grow the business fast enough. About is a totally different kind of business. About is good at two things the NYT is not. The first is cost per click advertising, which probably is going to supplant display advertising. Which is a huge problem if you’re [many of us in this room]. The second is search-engine optimization."

"The distributed content model of blogging and the walled garden world of newspaper and cable and network Web sites are going to have to come together in some kind of coherent, profitable sense. We don’t quite know how. I’m putting out all the content of the NY Times every night and it isn’t good enough."

To put the latter into context, Apcar's first comments to the group were, "I think the stakes have never been higher. As optimistic as I am about this medium I think the stakes are quite great. Can this medium support the great newsgathering organizations that big media has built?" More here.

Why did we show up for "Whose news?"

Why did we show up? Here's a quick take on opening questions asked at "Whose news?", a conference by API's Media Center held at the Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard University. For much more detailed notes on the day, photos and some video interviews, see Morph, Craig Newmark, Rebecca MacKinnon, Jeff Jarvis, Halley Suitt, David Weinberger, Susan Mernit and Chris Willis and Shayne Bowman.

(Note: Nope, this isn't everybody or everything said in introductory comments. It's an excerpt. Additional thoughts or corrections? Please add below.)

Rebecca MacKinnon - Right now we have elites talking to elites. How do we open up access and the discussion so that everyone has a voice?

Dan Froomkin - Bloggers are a fearless bunch, almost by definition. Will blogging make mainstream media more afraid or less afraid?

Henry Rubin - As someone who confronts 18-22 year old regularly, how do we get them to read the news? In any medium.

David Weinberger - I'm interested in issues of trust, the ways ownership is shifting, the way that ownership of metadata is shifting, including what constitutes a topic.

John Bracken - What does this mean for our funding and where should we be? So I have lots of questions...What's the role of public media, of public broadcasting and where is that going to be in five to ten years?

Jan Schaffer - Let's discuss not just democratization of new technology, but guiding capacity.

Pamela Johnson - How we keep journalism flourishing in the context of democracy?

Dennis Flynn - Question of trust related to brand. How do you chase the value based on a customer point of view?

Shayne Bowman - How the media is going to collaborate with its audience to make it more intelligent about the newsgathering process?

Chris Willis - Now what?

Carin Dessauer - Our challenge is to look at this as positive. We have never had so many choices we have never had so many opporunities in the media world. Our challenge is to make sure we don't become our own worst enemies.

Halley Suitt - If we make a big pie chart here, the word blogging would be quite small. I think it will probably be gone in two years.

Orville Schnell - How are young people going to make a living doing this? What's the ladder they're going to climb up? Are they entering a world like movies where there is no [path]?

Katherine von Jan - I'm here for shameless user advocacy, too!

Jay Rosen - The terms of authority are changing radically. All the ideas the journalists grew up with that explain who they are, how they do what they do, how they explain trust and how they explain authority. The whole media age has lead in one direction for a very long time, which was a centralizintion of media power. Now we're living through the time when it is being reversed. And it's a very shattering thing for people who have built their lives around the centralization of this power.

Rob Enderle - Make it something that users want to read. Let's see how we can help other people make thing shappen and then get out of the way.

Craig Newmark - I'm here to meet Wonkette. I'm not ready to disclose anything and I don't plan to say anything here.

Ty Ahmed-Taylor - I'm interested in how to aggregate eyeballs across different platforms. How do we get to a better way to delivering products which they find of value, which Google does particularly well but how do we apply this to other media/platforms?

Richard Sambrook - The key issues are quality of content and trust. This is what I think is going to differentiate media companies.

Michael Schrage - What is the future of peer review and quality editing. How will editing co-evolve?

Karen Stephenson - How do you measure trust? I think we're going to have to monetize trust if we're going to have an adequate business model.

William Weiss - People want to do what they wish they could do if only they knew they could do it. How do we help them?

Andreas Neus - Transformation from a centralized model. How can we change organization structures and culture to enable not just products but organizations to make the most of this collaborative model?

Len Apcar - I think the stakes have never been higher. As optimistic as I am about this medium I think the stakes are quite great. Can this medium support the great newsgathering organizations that big media has built?

Larry Grossman - What should be our public policy to encourage using the new media for the public good?

Jeff Jarvis - The revolution of the ants is going on. Enjoy it. It's really about finding that we understand each other. What we have to do is learn how to listen better...

Bill Gannon - How do we embrace the type of citizen journalism that Jeff and Jay and a lot of folks here are talking about? How do we get users involved? There are issues of scale, trust, craft. Just because someone has something to say, we may not want to expose them to 250 million users!

Danny Schecter - How does our media system serve [democracy] or, as I fear now, undermine it? This is a responsibility beyond business models, beyond craft.

Susan Mernit - Wants to talk about discussion/atomization, integration and adoption. I see big media companies rushing more quickly than I ever thought toward the user. Is that going to be a good thing or not?

Brian Reich - How do we take the passion that people have to getting a stop sign put up at the end of their street...and apply it to reporting and analyzing the news of the world?

Lisa Stone - And to promote shameless user advocacy.

(Notice I didn't reveal that I'm really here to re-meet Craig Newmark...)