LSQHA Blog Reviews

This morning, the Open Video Alliance is launching a campaign to bring video to Wikipedia . The project encourages Wikipedia users to add videos using the "100% free and open source video stack powered by HTML5 and Theora" that is the standard for the site. Our contention, however, is that while technical issues in adding media have certainly had a limiting role, is this all that has kept multimedia from dotting the pages of our favorite collaborative encyclopedia? Can video be collaborative? Sponsor While we wonder about the collaborative nature of the site versus the more fixed nature of video, others have already been hard at work making collaborative video a (potential) reality. We spoke today with Michael Dale, a self-professed "open-video evangelist" for Kaltura , who said that "we haven't really seen yet the collaborative sequencing aspects of the software," but that these tools are currently in development. Kaltura is the online video editing company that is working with Wikimedia to enable video on Wikipedia. Through meta data and other tools, the company is trying to make video a more collaborative media. The " Let's Get Video on Wikipedia " page offers a simple five-step how-to on how to add video to the site, but the only thing we're thinking it's missing is the "wash, rinse, repeat" aspect of adding any content to Wikipedia. While it is rather simple to go in and edit a sentence here and a paragraph there in a text format, editing a video is not nearly as simple. Now videos can be easily uploaded, how will Wikipedia's users contend with the medium? If a three-minute long video is added to an article, but 30 seconds of it contain somewhat disputed ideas, interspersed through out, will these parts simply be cut? Will the whole video be scrapped or will another user take the video, slice those parts out and insert their own? And in the end, if this is the case, what sort of mish-mash multimedia will we end up with in the end? This is the next step, it would seem. "Once there are more tools available," said Dale, "I think we'll see more experimentation." It's not as if these questions are new to the Wikipedia community, as you can read in its proposed guidelines , which suggest that videos will should likely be limited to "snapshot-type", "performance-type" and "tour-type" videos. Even with these limitations, if you've ever looked through the history of changes on Wikipedia articles, then you know how even the finest points of an idea can be discussed and dissected. According to a video interview with Kaltura co-founder Michal Tsur on Beet.TV , "users should be able to use video just the same way they're using text", but a word is a word is a word. A video, even a tiny bit of video, can differ in lighting, sound, angle and any number of other variables. "The actual fact is that we're just getting started," Dale pointed out. "There's not a clear idea of how video will work and be used." In the end, we think video sounds like a great idea, but wonder how widespread it can really become on a platform that holds collaboration in such high esteem. Whether or not video collaboration takes off on Wikipedia, we would love to see what could be created within other contexts (i.e. not encyclopedic) with the collaborative video tools that Dale says are currently in development. Discuss

Continue reading here:
Multimedia Wikipedia: Can Video Be Collaborative?

As of today, Zillow's online real estate marketplace application is now available on phones running the Google Android mobile operating system. The new Android app is similar to the previously launched iPhone version but includes a couple of additional features like voice search and the incorporation of Google Street View images. Sponsor The company hopes to expand on the success of their iPhone application - an app downloaded nearly one million times - with the launch of their mobile app for the rapidly growing Android user base. Like its predecessor, Zillow's mobile app provides "Zestimate" home values, home details and historical data on 95 million homes in the U.S. Users can browse through listing information, including photos and home details, and then call or email the associated real estate agent right from within the application. There are also filtering mechanisms that allow users to search for homes by price, number of bedrooms and bathrooms as well as listing type (for sale, for rent, etc.) Android Users Get Extra Features With the new app, Android users benefit from their phone's technology in order to access a few additional features. For instance, with the new Google Street View option, users are able to see curbside photos of all the homes in a particular neighborhood, whether or not they're for sale or rent. This is a great benefit for mobile home shoppers who want to know more about the neighborhood where a particular house is located. Is it on a busy street? Are the other houses nearby in good repair? Does it have sidewalks? And so on. Another unique feature for Android users is voice search. Users can speak the address, neighborhood or city into the mobile application and be taken there on the map. The Zillow app works whether you're searching for new homes from your living room or whether you're driving around looking at houses. If the latter, Zillow taps into the phone's GPS to place your location on a map and show you the nearby home data. It's also worth noting that you don't have to be a potential homeowner to take advantage of Zillow. In mid-December, the company added rental listings to their online and mobile services, a savvy business decision in a down economy where many are now choosing to rent until the market stabilizes. Get It Now You can see the Android application in action over here on YouTube or you can download in now for free via www.zillow.com/android . If you have neither an iPhone or Android phone, you can alternately access Zillow.com via its mobile site at Zillow Mobile . Discuss

More here:
Popular Real Estate App Zillow Debuts on Android

Most any journalism professor, upon mention of Wikipedia , will immediately launch into a rant about how the massively collaborative online encyclopedia can't be trusted. It can, you see, be edited and altered by absolutely anyone at any moment. But how much less trustworthy is the site for breaking news than the plethora of blogs and other online news sources? Sponsor Even Moka Pantages , the communications officer for the WikiMedia Foundation , said she agreed with this sentiment when she spoke this morning at the South By South West festival in Austin, at a panel entitled " Process Journalism: Getting It First, While Getting It Right ". Here's the thing - we have to say that everything she said before answering this question seems to say otherwise. Tackling Real-Time Content The panel featured journalists from the New York Times , SeattlePI.com , Journerdism.com and Gizmodo and a common theme was that user-created content - whether tweets, YouTube videos, or otherwise - could and should be used in breaking news coverage. The panelists all agreed that this content should be verified in some way and should be presented to the audience with a high degree of transparency. Each panelist spoke about a specific case study - the New York Times' coverage of last summer's protests in Iran, for example - and discussed how they gathered crowd-sourced information and attempted to verify its authenticity. Robert Mackey, the reporter for the New York Times, gave examples of translating chants heard in YouTube videos and matching up street signs that flashed on screen with Google Maps. Once he was sure of its validity, he said, he would add it to the coverage. "When you're sitting in an office in New York and you're trying to confirm that something was shot in Tehran that day was actually shot in Tehran that day, you're not going to be able to verify that," he said. "The idea is that it's a conversation on the web about this event." The Newsroom Moves Online Monica Guzman, a reporter for SeattlePI.com, spoke similarly about her website's breaking coverage of a shooting and the subsequent day-long man hunt. SeattlePI, formerly a print publication, has existed solely online for nearly a year now. Most of the breaking information that day, she said, came from Twitter. "The media collaborated with itself and it was one big swirling newsroom on Twitter," said Guzman. "We ended up using tweets as starting points. And Twitter did end up breaking a bunch of stuff." While SeattlePI was able to send reporters out and verify some of the information in person, how was the rest of it verified? "Common sense," she answered. The Seattle Times, she said, had more than 500 people collaborating on Google Wave to gather information on the same story. Wikipedia Takes On The Mumbai Terror Attacks Then came Pantages' turn to discuss how the Wikipedia community addressed the 2008 terrorist attacks in Mumbai . While it is said, as we started out with, that Wikipedia just shouldn't be trusted, the case we heard for its coverage of a breaking news situation far surpassed what you might often see on your average blog or even traditional newspaper. One particular user, Kensplanets , was a driving force behind the coverage, using breaking news from IBN.com as a source. In cases such as this one, the crowdsourcing aspect not only allows multiple points of view, but also allows aggregation from multiple points in a number of different languages and locations. "It's not just U.S.-centric information," Pantages explained, "You have the New York Times, Reuters, Times of India - they're all there." According to Pantages , by the end of the first day of the Wikipedia article's life, it had been edited more than 360 times, by 70 different editors referring to 28 separate sources from news outlets around the web. While this could seem like a situation rife for misdirection and misinformation, the constant discussion swirling around the creation of an article, Pantages explained, is "really similar to what you would think should be in a newsroom." Nonetheless, we still disparage Wikipedia as an untrusted source of news. Wikipedia As News Aggregator Just like other news aggregation services, Wikipedia takes many sources and puts them in to a central location, but with the added benefit of human curation instead of algorithmic collection. "There's no real-time reporting going on in Wikipedia, it's real-time aggregation," Pantages said. So the very first level of information vetting, which happens at the reporting level, has already taken place by the time it reaches the site. Then the hundreds or thousands of editors continue to scrutinize the information, discussing edits and potential changes in the back channels. The news we read in our daily newspapers, on the other hand, is curated by only a small number of people. Surely, there is the question of qualification, but many of Wikipedia's contributors and editors are, themselves, professionals. In contrast, we often accept news from other blogs as immediately trustworthy, while a Wikipedia article such as this one, which is transparent in its creation, its sourcing and its transmutation over time, we dismiss as flawed from conception. Today, the 2008 Mumbai Attacks article sits at more nearly 43,000 words with over 150 different sources cited and 1,245 unique editors. While Pantages argues that "Wikipedia should not be a source, it should be a starting off point," we would have to argue the same for news media in general. In this crowd-sourced news environment we've entered, blindly consuming news and content, from any source, is an ill-advised path to follow. With that said, if we are willing to take crowd-sourced content - whether tweets, Facebook updates, blogs, videos or whatever else - as valid sources for information about our world, then a collection of these same media as carefully poured over and curated as found in a Wikipedia article should be even more trusted, not less, than those bits on their own. Traditional media get bits of breaking news wrong all the time, but we accept that as part of the game. To vilify Wikipedia for the same errors sets unequal standards and besides, you'll likely never see the same level of transparency in traditional media about where it went wrong. With Wikipedia, it's all laid bare for the world to see. Discuss

See the original post here:
Why Wikipedia Should Be Trusted As A Breaking News Source

Kaiser Kuo presented today at SXSW about Google in China. He spoke about how the Google situation will impact Chinese Internet users, other companies and the Chinese government. In the presentation, Kuo (who also spoke to ReadWriteWeb a week ago) clarified how censorship in China works. Contrary to popular belief, it is not the Great Firewall that has the most impact in China - but something China calls "self-discipline." Kuo also discussed what the next moves will be from Google, since he believes that the ball is in Google's court and Beijing won't push the situation. Sponsor History of Google in China Before getting down to the nitty gritty of the current Google-China standoff, Kaiser Kuo gave some valuable context to Google in China. In 2005 Google started to hire aggressively in China, he said. Google's decision to enter China with a censored product immediately brought grief to Google, with some pundits describing it as a "black day for Internet freedom." Google defended its actions at that point by saying that not providing search to a fifth of the world's population would be a greater loss than having censored results. At first Google had a notice on their search results stating that they were censored. Kuo also pointed out that Google only omitted results that users wouldn't have been able to view anyway had they clicked through (because the pages or sites were blocked). At that point, Google didn't host Gmail, personal search history, Blogger or other services that had personal information. Google in China also protected their employees, Kuo noted. Google never had an easy time of it in China. For example, many Chinese users couldn't spell the word "Google." Regulators made it difficult for them, as did their Chinese competitors. Google did manage to make good revenues and market share, but never "moved the needle" against its Chinese search competitor Baidu. Kuo remarked that Google was not singled out for any special treatment by the Chinese government. In 2009 Google got into trouble due to pornography in its search results, and it went dark for a short time as a result. There has been a massive growth in Internet users in China in the four years since Google entered that market. There were 2-3 million Internet users in China when Google began operations there; now there are 384 million Internet users in China. Google has around 35% market share in China, which has not been matched by any other Western company. Its annual revenues in China is around $300-400 million in revenue, which is nothing to sneeze at. In mid-December 2009 there was a hacker attack on Google, which in January Google claimed on its blog came from China. At that time Google also announced it would stop censoring search results on google.cn. Kuo doesn't believe this announcement was a cynical retreat from China due to its being defeated by Chinese competitors, which many pundits suggested at the time. Kuo said that the challenge to Google's business model is around trust, for personal data in the cloud. So Google's blog post in China was appropriate, Kuo believes. Some people have suggested that the Chinese government used the strategy known in China as "Using Quiescience to control action." The government has however unblocked Google Docs and Groups, and has not blocked any further Google services since January. Currently Google is still hiring in China and is in the midst of negotiations with the Chinese government. Kuo believes there is deliberate confusion right now."It's impossible to grasp what Google is up against without having a better grasp of how censorship in China works." The Great Firewall There are two main types of Internet censorship in China, said Kuo. The first is The Great Firewall of China, which has been nick-named "Iron Curtain 2.0." It's a system of filters at domain name or page level. Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Blogger and other western sites have been blocked at this level. Kuo said that it's fairly simple for Chinese Internet users to "hop the firewall " using proxy services, free VPNs. So The Great Firewall is more of an inconvenience. Kuo pays for a VPN that allows him to access Western websites. Self-Discipline The second form of censorship is "more pernicious and effective," according to Kuo. It is carried out by Internet companies, on instructions from Chinese government. All Internet sites in China have to practice what is termed "self-discipline." Failing to adhere to this form of censorship means having your website or service shut down. There are some 30,000 "Internet police." Two cartoon avatars are wont to show up if a Chinese user visits pages with content offensive to the Chinese government. Most Internet users in China don't come across the Great Firewall, because most Chinese Internet users don't use Western services like Twitter and Facebook. But, Kuo said, "Google is different." It has become "a real part of the Internet culture in China." Kuo then talked about how Chinese censorship nowadays is almost all social media sites, such as social networks and microblogging sites. How Chinese Netizens Use The Internet Kuo mentioned that the Chinese Internet is more "entertainment superhighway" than "information superhighway." Online gaming is big in China. Most Chinese Internet users, Kuo said, enjoy the Internet that they have - rather than worry about the one that Western pundits think they should have. The Internet has also emerged as a de-facto public sphere in China. As long as you don't overstep certain boundaries (political activism and so forth), then the "will of the masses" is often expressed on the Internet through the likes of bulletin boards or social networks. Regularly, Chinese netizens are exposing public officials. However Kuo warns that there are "very very serious limits" to what is emerging in the public sphere. For example, anonymity leads to a lot of trolling. It's ad-hoc, reactive and informal - however it is a "squeaky wheel that is regularly getting grease." Also, a minority are pro-democracy - most of the netizens in the public sphere are pro-Chinese government. Next Moves from Beijing and Google Kuo said that the Chinese government will wait for Google to make the next move. It realises it has nothing to gain by pushing Google or being openly hostile. The ball is in Google's court and it will probably keep to its word that it will stop censorship in China. It may still shut down operations in China, which in practice means closing google.cn. But this has a lot of problematic scenarios - including the difficulty of having translations done for Google.com and staffing issues of closing down. The pros of pulling out of China include saving face and appeasing western users. But the cons are significant. They include a backlash from tech-savvy, urban Google users, a setback to scientific research, a global black eye for their image, and ceding the virtual monopoly in search in China to Baidu. The moderate scenario is that Google.cn is shut down, but continues to work with its mobile partners in China, R&D and sales continue to operate in China, and Google services will be unblocked. The best case scenario, Kuo believes, would be if Google stopped censoring google.cn - but the service stays online. Discuss

Read more:
What Google Will Do in China (SXSW Presentation)

Navigating SXSW is overwhelming to say the least! To help you out ReadWriteWeb has been breaking the events, panels and parties down into vertical reviews. This post provides what we think are some of the best for marketers and online strategists. We'd also love to hear your recommendations in the comments. Online strategy is multi-faceted. You need to know as much about marketing and understanding people and their motivations as you do perfecting the online experience, understanding the next technology breakthrough on the horizon and being an excellent conversationalist - while still being able to measure the impact of it all. So this list provides a smattering of some of the best to see in all four. Sponsor This is part of a series of ReadWriteWeb guides to SXSW Interactive 2010. If this guide isn't your cup of tea, be sure to check back for more information soon! How Your Brand Can Succeed in the New Web With Brian Solis. "Engage is the new book by Brian Solis that will debut at SXSW. Representing the third book on new media and its impact on society, culture and communication. Engage will help anyone not only understand the changes in the media landscape but also how to lead it. Brian Solis will be joined by a special guest to discuss the new book and answer questions followed by a book signing." The Future of Influence "The ability to share online has allowed consumers to control and filter the Web. For brands and publishers, tapping into Influence is critical to social media's future. What is influence and how is it measured? Leading voices in social media from multiple backgrounds will define the value of influence, discuss best practices, and predict future impact. Data will be shared! This panel is sponsored by ShareThis." With Tim Schigel, Paul Berry, Dave Knox, Mike John-Baptiste, Shiv Singh. Extending Your Brand? There's an App for That "For many, brand extension into the digital realm means a Web site, a banner ad, a viral campaign. But applications can extend conversations and perceptions of a brand, as well as add to discussions and ideas in compelling new ways. How can applications help your brand and idea be more authentic, genuine, user friendly, and just plain old fun? Learn from the folks that are making it happen. This panel is sponsored by Microsoft Silverlight." The Human Experience With Gary Vaynerchuk. The content of this presentation has not been announced, but knowing Gary and his successful track record in growing business through the use of social media, this one is not to be missed. Program or be Programmed: Ten Commands for a Digital Age With Douglas Rushkoff. "Winner of the first Neil Postman award for Career Achievement in Public Intellectual Activity, Douglas Rushkoff is an author, teacher, and documentarian who focuses on the ways people, cultures, and institutions create, share, and influence each other's values." I Don't Trust You One Stinking Bit "What gives people confidence on the Web? Bringing together experts in social capital and online trust, we help you build the company your users can love and call their own." With Chris Brogan and Julien Smith. Monkeys with Internet Access: Sharing, Human Nature, and Digital Data Clay Shirky hasn't announced the content of his presentation yet. He "divides his time between consulting, teaching, and writing on the social and economic effects of Internet technologies. His consulting practice is focused on the rise of decentralized technologies such as peer-to-peer, Web services, and wireless networks that provide alternatives to the wired client/server infrastructure that characterizes the Web." The Young and the Digital With Craig Watkins. "In 2006, S. Craig Watkins participated in the MacArthur Foundation's well-funded digital media initiative alongside a select team of scholars and tech experts. The goal was simple: to understand young people's emphatic embrace of social and mobile media. Watkins went on to build a small research team that skillfully collected over 500 surveys and conducted 350 in-depth interviews with young adults, parents, and educators." Design and Usability, The UX of Mobile "The term 'user experience' used to be an afterthought in mobile application design. The iPhone changed all that and has set a new benchmark for user experience on mobile devices. This panel will serve as a primer for anyone interested in learning how to apply UX principles to the creation of applications for iPhone, Android, and mobile websites." With Barbara Ballard, Tom Limongello, Scott Jenson. The Ten Commandments of User Experience "User experience is the result of your interactions with a product or service, specifically how it's delivered and its related artifacts according to the design. In this presentation we will explain how following the 10 commandments can boost your project's ease of use, appeal, conversion rates, and more." With Raina Van Cleave, Nick Finck. Persuasive Design: Encouraging Your Users To Do What You Want Them To! "So you've designed a great product, fixed a stack of usability problems and spent a fortune on marketing. The only problem is, people aren't using it. In this session you will learn how to get your users to do what you want them to through good design, human psychology and a touch of mind control." With Andy Budd. My Three-Year Old Is My Usability Expert "Children are perfect testers for the innate usability of visual structures. Learn how neuroscience and cognitive psychology research can make your designs and interfaces more intuitive." With Dave Stanton. Can the Real-Time Web Be Realized? "The emergence of the real-time Web enables an unprecedented level of user engagement and dynamic content online. However, the rapidly growing audience puts new, complex demands on the architecture of the Web as we know it. This panel will discuss what is needed to make the real-time Web achievable." With Scott Raymond, Brett Slatkin, Dare Obasanjo, Marshall Kirkpatrick, Jack Moffitt. Time + Social + Location. What's Next In Mobile Experiences? "As more devices become location aware, social uses will continue to evolve beyond just who and what,to WHEN. Adding the temporal dimension creates new opportunities for social interaction. Learn about ways to leverage and use technology to add features at the intersection of temporal, social, and location." With Naveen Selvadurai, Josh Babetski, Greg Cypes. ActivityStrea.ms: Is It Getting Streamy In Here? "From Facebook's newsfeed to Twitter's relentless real-time updates, the metaphor of the "stream" has taken social networking beyond blog posts and on to rich social activities. Learn about ActivityStrea.ms - the open format adopted by Facebook, MySpace, and Windows Live - and how it's fundamentally changing the social Web." With Chris Messina. HTML5: Tales from the Development Trenches "HTML5 is coming. Originally called "Web applications 1.0", it brings new semantics, JavaScript APIs for drag and drop, offline storage, generating images, plugin-free video and form validation. It's upset semantic Web advocates, accessibility evangelists and baffled developers. Cut through the crap: learn what it is and what it does." What Are Analytics? A Guide To Practical Data "Analytics are often a confusing and convoluted mess, but that doesn't mean that they have to be. The Guide to Practical Data will help ensure you're reaching your full analytical potential. Learn how to analyze public and proprietary data to accelerate the success of any initiative." With Margaret Francis, Blake Robinson. Those are our SXSW Interaction recommendations for marketers and Web strategists. If you've got suggestions or feedback, let us know in the comments! See you in Austin! Discuss

Read more from the original source:
SXSW 2010 for Marketers & Online Strategists