Ada Lovelace Day

About The Authors

Suw Charman-Anderson

Suw Charman-Anderson

Suw Charman-Anderson is a social software consultant and writer who specialises in the use of blogs and wikis behind the firewall. With a background in journalism, publishing and web design, Suw is now one of the UK’s best known bloggers, frequently speaking at conferences and seminars.

Her personal blog is Chocolate and Vodka, and yes, she’s married to Kevin.

Email Suw

Kevin Anderson

Kevin Anderson

Kevin Anderson is a freelance journalist and digital strategist with more than a decade of experience with the BBC and the Guardian. He has been a digital journalist since 1996 with experience in radio, television, print and the web. As a journalist, he uses blogs, social networks, Web 2.0 tools and mobile technology to break news, to engage with audiences and tell the story behind the headlines in multiple media and on multiple platforms.

From 2009-2010, he was the digital research editor at The Guardian where he focused on evaluating and adapting digital innovations to support The Guardian’s world-class journalism. He joined The Guardian in September 2006 as their first blogs editor after 8 years with the BBC working across the web, television and radio. He joined the BBC in 1998 to become their first online journalist outside of the UK, working as the Washington correspondent for

And, yes, he’s married to Suw.

E-mail Kevin.

Member of the Media 2.0 Workgroup
Dark Blogs Case Study

Case Study 01 - A European Pharmaceutical Group

Find out how a large pharma company uses dark blogs (behind the firewall) to gather and disseminate competitive intelligence material.

free page hit counter

hit counter script

All content © Kevin Anderson and/or Suw Charman

Interview series:
at the FASTforward blog. Amongst them: John Hagel, David Weinberger, JP Rangaswami, Don Tapscott, and many more!

Corante Blog

Sunday, September 24th, 2006

EuroOSCON: Tom Steinberg - Hackers guide to democracy

Posted by Suw Charman-Anderson

After EuroFOO cam EuroOSCON, the open source convention organised by O’Reilly. I didn’t take notes at all the sessions I went to, but did for a few. Here’s Tom Steinbergs.

Tips for anyone trying to replicate MySociety’s work in other

- Scrape and structure public data that’s already out there, e.g. Hansard. If you can make stuff more readable and searchable, you can make public information more valuable and encourage people to come to your site to experience that information.

- Out-Google them. If the public data is shite, and you tidy it up and republish it in a nicely structured way, you’ll get more people from Google, so people will find your stuff who aren’t looking for it.

For example, Fax Your MP used to be no 1 in Google for ‘MP’. Have never spent any money on marketing the MySociety brand because it’s more important that people who want to do something stumble upon their sites when they really need them.

When you have structured data, the temptation is to pretty it up and make it usable, and put it on the web and leave it there. But email alerts are more important than even syndication. People rely on email and it’s really valuable. Even though email is old-fashioned, if you want people to visit once, get hooked, and return in the future then email alerts are the way to do it alongside RSS.

- Aggregate. The sum of all the data is more valuable than the individual parts. If you have a large mass of data, try to dig into it and look at what’s important to separate out. Create feedback mechanisms when relevant, e.g. ask if users got a response from their MP and whether they had written to an MP ever before.

- Ratings. If you can give them ranks, e.g. where they rank in terms of turning up for votes. Politicians like ranks, and they will respond so they will rearrange how they do things like handle mail so that they get a better response rate on WriteToThem. The negative accusations are that politicians will then do things like table written questions even when they aren’t interested in the answer just so that they look good on TheyWorkForYou. So be careful what you do and think about what the repercussions are.

- Reject cool over useful. Focus on building technologies that are ‘training free’. Ask what can you create that doesn’t require any training to use it. Try and tap into the tech that people already have. FaxYourMP and WriteToThem have something in common - a message from someone. Didn’t matter that faxes are non-internet, low-tech, it still works because the process has been made easy by bolting on an interface. Fax evolved to email naturally in business, so MySociety moved from fax to email naturally then.

- Create new forms of pressure. Politicians are almost immune to pressure, because they deal with it all the time. So if you put ‘normal’ pressure on a politician then it might not work because they’re used to it. But putting new pressure on them works, e.g. putting a rank on them was a new pressure they didn’t have before. E.g. HearFromYourMP, which allows you to sign up to get an email from your MP and discuss it with other local people. So the service looks then for a threshold, e.g. 25 people in one constituents, then it mails the MP and says that these people want to hear from *you*. So it encourages the MP to then hit reply and engage. If they ignore it, then when the list is 50 people, it sends another email. Eventually they will give in because it becomes untenable to ignore it.

People are not used to being given platforms to discuss things with their constituents. But it’s also peer pressure because the system shows them who in their peer group is already doing this. One in five MPs asked has already used the system.

Been rebuilt in Germany, but the code is open source so can be reused.

But more general lesson is what pressure can you put on people that they are not used to.

- Be prepared for effects. Think when you put things up about what will happen if you’re wildly successful? Or what happens if people start gaming the system. Having a debate in parliament about how the tools can change so that they are more effective and don’t waste any public time/money.

If you design your site to look like a boxing ring, people will fight; if you design it to encourage constructive discussion, that’s what they’ll tend to do. But do use cunning filters etc. to try and pre-empt spam etc.

Sunday, September 24th, 2006

EuroFOO: Chocolate

Posted by Suw Charman-Anderson

it just seems wrong to blog about chocolate here, when I have a blog called Chocolate and Vodka, so I’ve put my notes from Tor Nørretranders’s chocolate session there instead of here.

Sunday, September 24th, 2006

EuroFOO: Working a four day week

Posted by Suw Charman-Anderson

This session was lead by Ryan Carson, and it was one I was particularly interested in. My aim for the next few years is to work part-time on the stuff that pays the bills, and spend the rest of my time writing books and stuff like that. I’ve thought a lot about this issues, and it’s one I want to write more on in future. But certainly this was one of the most enlightening sessions of EuroFOO, partly because I didn’t realise that there were other people who were challenging the tyranny of the over-developed work ethic.

Anyway…. to my notes:

We don’t need to work five days - there’s no rule that we have to work five days. It’s just a matter of choosing. We [Ryan and his wife Gillian] have total control, so why not choose to work less and that will give us more time to experience things outside work.

It wasn’t because work is bad, we love what we do, but it was more that if you work in the web industry it can be all consuming and can take over your life completely. And you end up checking email, and post on blogs, and it’s Monday and it’s time to work again.

We decided to work Monday - Thursday, 9-6, and have two employees, and pay them a full salary but they also only work 4 days a week, and they get 30 days holiday a week. And the idea is that people tend to work 5 days because they spread their work out over five days instead of thinking ‘gotta get stuff done because I’ve only got 4 days’.

In the run up to the Future of Web Apps, they didn’t abide by that rule but the rest of the time they do.

Martin: Law firm, 17 employees, had a discussion that the best thing would be prolong the weekend with an extra Monday or Friday, but not everyone takes the same day.

Ryan: Good thing is that everyone else is working on a Friday, and it’s quiet to be out and about. Very empowering.

Part of this is that we have products instead of clients, so if you have a client you can’t tell them not to call on Fridays.

Protestant work ethic, Lutherian, divorced from religion now, but people are almost perversely proud to be working 16 hours a day. In many non-western countries people are a lot less about working, they are happy to avoid work. In the west, particularly UK and US, this work ethic has become rampant.

Company cultures, top-down, decide what’s important, and what the holiday culture is. So Carson can decide how to live, and then let their employees live like that two. If you’re at a company and your boss isn’t going to do a four day week, then you aren’t going to be able to.

Have to realise that it makes sense to give people more time off. Why is it that Scandinavian societies are more productive with shorter working weeks? When you measure productivity in America, or between Denmark and Sweden, those with more time off are more efficient.

Yet also need to allow for downtime, for chatting, and getting to know people and what’s going on. Having 4 days to work really focuses you and you cut out what’s not important. If it’s not important it doesn’t get done, but that doesn’t matter because it wasn’t important.

Can easily create an unreal pressure to work more. But that pressure is in your head, it’s not always real.

What’s interesting from working 4 days a week is that they have to leave the laptops at work over the weekend else they just log in to email and then that turns into work.

Me: I need to turn laptop off at 10pm so that my brain has time to wind down before bed. But there’s a real blurring between work and play, so you end up feeling you’re ‘faffing’ all day.

Ryan: Important to challenge our perceptions of how much we are supposed to work. If you enjoy playing scrabble on your laptop, then that’s cool, but we decided that it’s best for us to force ourselves to do that. But that sort of constraints are not for everyone.

Realised that by being on the computer all the time, we weren’t experiencing very much.

Martin: Question of focusing and being more aware of instead of trying to process a lot of information. Trying to powernap. Programme that generates power-naps. Does a power-nap at 1pm and 7pm.

Paula: Expectation management. People don’t care how much you work, they care that the thing that they care about gets addressed. It’s important to set expectations with people right from the beginning. Felt so passionate about it, didn’t think about setting limits. But energy levels aren’t sustainable if you don’t.

Me: Also need to set expectations for yourself, and realise that other people’s expectations may not be what you think they are. Email is the biggest stressor. Have had to set ‘away’ messages saying ‘I have too much email’.

Paula: Have to set boundaries early on. Have to also give yourself permission to think of every moment away from home as a ‘work’ moment, when you travel.

Ryan: Martyrdom pride in the tech industry, and ‘oh we’re launching a product and working 7 day weeks’ but that actually means that you’re doing it wrong.

If you can, get a PA. Getting rid of phones for some people. Email - can react later - doesn’t have to be immediate.

Paula: Ask more. Interrogates requests, asks for more info, when do people need things? To what depth? Because assumptions are: immediate; to the greatest depth.

Martin: and people like being asked those questions.

Paula: Teaching people to give info in the first place. Starting to get more qualified requests which helps her to prioritise.

Saturday, September 23rd, 2006

EuroFOO: Future Spy

Posted by Suw Charman-Anderson

Fiona Romeo is looking for ideas for an exhibition on the future of spying at the Science Museum, called SPYMAKER: The Science of Spying. Again, some very rough notes:

The exhibition is for 8 - 12 year olds, and is about speculative spy technologies. Most people come in family or school groups, rarely individuals. Everything has to be accessible, including for people with visual/hearing impairments, so aim for multisensory.

The idea of people in the same public space is rare. Put attention back on the people that are there. 20 objects in a room. Science, and soft sciences, so can include psychology etc. Consider learning outcomes. Trying to cover a range of different ways to think about things. Future focus. Surveillance/counter-surveillance product of the next 20 years. Exhibition will run for five years.

Only restriction is that you shouldn’t break the laws of physics that are currently seen as true.

Small budget. Limited moving parts. Models. Has to work wihtout actually having to work. Must communicate within 30 seconds - 1 minute. Has to appeal to 5 - 75 year olds.

Don’t only mean espionage. Spying has become more ‘democratised’. Tech gives more hi-tech seeing powers. Big Brother, Big Sister - your mother, local council, etc.

Directions - things so small they are hard to detech. Remote spying. Body odour signature. Harder to detect, less visible. Denial of access based on computer analysis. RFID is of the moment. Increased computing power. Processing huge volume of information, e.g. to process all telephone calls.

Everything will be done under a Creative Commons attribution licence. Has to relate to the every day life of an 8 year old. Take beyond where technology has been perfected, and go to where they become baroque. Once things are really accepted, they becomes the customisable.

So… we split into groups at this point and had a think about it. My idea, which others expanded, was about DNA espionage, suits that stop you shedding skin and hair for DNA harvesting, and which you peel off at the end of the day… or a suit that has someone else’s DNA impregnated in it…

Already a DNA spray of 100 or so people that thieves spray around.

Other ideas…
Gait recognition from video, which allows them to recognise individual. Also allows them to recognise suicide. Predict criminals and arrest.

Car and phone tracking… can already track cars via automatic numberplate recognition. So what about tracking people via jewellery, engagement rings.

Games that tell you when people are close to you.

God bots in 3D digital worlds, watching what people are doing. Are we going to be allowed to protect ourselves from that sort of surveillance.

This was a fun session, actually. I’m just sorry my notes are so random and rough.

Saturday, September 23rd, 2006

EuroFOO: Pirate Party

Posted by Suw Charman-Anderson

Sven Riedel gave us an overview of what the Pirate Party’s up to, and we had a great discussion about what ORG does. My rough and ready notes:

Sprouting all over Europe and US, small topic-based party. Swedish Pirate Bay, server confiscation, media attention, more Pirate Parties springing up.

- Goals - copyrights/patents: e.g. no software patents; limit copyright, e.g. disney copyright on Mickey Mouse, so pressure on congress to extend, Sonny-Bono.
- data privacy: who gets access to what dat, show shares the data, how’s it cross-referenced, anti-terorrism rage - thin veil to gather as much data as possible,
- transparent gov’t: what is gov’t doing, why, what contracts are they giving out under what conditions, e.g. toll autobahn system, mfr couldn’t keep to the deadline but didn’t have to pay a fine, was in contract but gov’t wouldn’t tell anyone.
- Open access: particularly in Germany, scientific community has to publish papers in specific journals and not allowed to publish elsewhere, so scientists have to pay for these journals.

[academic papers, digital journals]

Technical reports. Grants were off the back of the papers you’d publish, but people would also publish a significantly “modified technical report” in order to get round it.

Reputation problem.

Change grants system, to get people to publish openly by forcing it as a condition on the grant. Citations - use those to see which are held in esteem even if they are published in lesser known journals.

We agree open access is a good thing, but why is this a party?

Just a few topics that are agreed upon, and are being publicised. For issues like taxation, the party doesn’t currently have any opinions. Is about getting legislation to counter lobbying etc.

In Germany, Pirate Party has status of Greens in the late 70s.

Current opinion in the party is ‘well cross the taxation bridge when we come to it’.

The name is provocative, it’s unusual.

- should publicly support Open GeoData; INSPIRE
- should Open Source be on there? In transparent gov’t but not a major point. Should be able to debug the gov’s tenders to ensure open standards and open source software.

Do deal with DRM. Line is: DRM sucks.

Goal is to be elected to EU Parliament in 2008 elections. Hoping to get one or two people in there.


Personally, I’m interested to see how this all goes. I think that the Pirate Party needs to think a bit beyond its own goals in order to get anyone elected. I would also imagine that if they do get anyone elected, it’ll be in a country with proportional representation, so no chance here.

Saturday, September 23rd, 2006

EuroFOO: Building a Tricorder

Posted by Suw Charman-Anderson

I was lucky enough to be invited not just to FOOCamp this year, but also its European counterpart, EuroFOO. Just like FOOCamp, which by the end of the two days had become known as ‘FooFoo’, EuroFOO was a fantastic gathering of really smart people who were happy to just chat about whatever it was that came up. I took more notes at EuroFOO than at FooFoo, and whilst I’m not going to blog all of them, I will give you some highlights.

Matt Jones, with help from Matt Webb and Simon Willison, ran a session on how to build a tricorder specifically for finding out more about your immediate environment, which split us up into three teams - one to work on some Python, one to think about the top-level design/functionality spec, and one to go out into the street and ask locals some questions. The questions were from Kevin Kelly’s ‘Big Here’, including:

1) Point north.
2) What time is sunset today?
3) Trace the water you drink from rainfall to your tap.
4) When you flush, where do the solids go? What happens to the waste water?
5) How many feet above sea level are you?
6) What spring wildflower is consistently among the first to bloom here?
7) How far do you have to travel before you reach a different watershed? Can you draw the boundaries of yours? 8) Is the soil under your feet, more clay, sand, rock or silt?
9) Before your tribe lived here, what did the previous inhabitants eat and how did they sustain themselves?
10) Name five native edible plants in your neighborhood and the season(s) they are available.

I joined the team working out the top-level spec, and the interesting thing to me was how everyone went off in different directions. I’ve seen this happen elsewhere - unless one or two people are holding the torch and saying ‘Follow me!’ the collaboration disintegrates. There was a lot of meta discussion, but not a huge amount of real collaboration.

We thought a bit about potential data sources, where you could get data about the environment and acts of nature. One person made a tangential but interesting point that children waste a lot of brain power on things like Pokemon cards, so why not do a set based on flowers, teaching them to identify native species, invaders, and weeds. Nice idea.

We talked about almanac data, how you map data onto a grid and whether postcode data is useful or GPS better. Talked about layers of data superimposed over the grid, such as a watershed layer which had info about the water table and which direction groundwater flows in.

Then we analysed how the original tricorder had sensors, but ours was not about sensing local conditions but conveying local information gathered asynchronously.

What technology is already out there to solve this problem? We already have a mobile phone, GeoDB, sources of information… so just need a model for interaction.

So the interface could be text based, map based, representative image based (e.g. an image of a landcape with the sunset/sunrise in the sun, tree with local flora information, etc.), or a 3D fly through like Second LIfe with a heads-up display.

At the end of the session, the three groups reported back. The most interesting thing came from the people who’d gone out to do interviews. They discovered that people find out that they are actually intrigued by the questions Kevin Kelly sets, and wanted to know the answers and how well they did. Mainly, they knew where North was, knew when sunset was, knew where the rubbish went, but not much else. Yet once their lack of knowledge was illustrated by their inability to answer these questions, they became curious to find out the real answers.

Interesting session, and it made me think a lot about motivation, education and the separation between man and environment.

Monday, September 18th, 2006

Why I blog, and why the MSM should and many times shouldn’t

Posted by Kevin Anderson

That’s the title of the talk I gave last week at IBC and that I have given in various forms at other places over the last year. I began the talk by showing off some numbers from Dave Sifry’s most recent State of the Blogosphere reports, the latest one being from early in August. Technorati is now tracking 50 million blogs, and that’s just a self-selecting sample of people who have registered with the site (well self selecting and plenty of splogs, spam blogs, which the Team Technorati is working on trimming from its ranks). That’s a lot of people.

The mainstream media, or MSM for short, can give 16-year-olds trying to lay their hands on the latest fashion a run for their money when it comes to herd-like activity. And newspapers, TV networks and everyone else trying to protect or resurrect an old media business model have jumped enmasse on what Jon Stewart called the Blogwagon. But it’s mostly been an unthinking, headlong rush towards the blogosphere, “to get snaps” from the good-as-advertising-gold 18-to-34 demographic.

Is this really about giving a voice to the already voiced, as Jon Stewart says? What value is it to our audiences to serve up ‘news sushi’, content we already produce and publish but just served up in bite-sized blog bits in reverse chronological order? And I can hear the editors out there saying: “But blogs are just snarky comment, and hey we’ve got snarky columnists in spades. We are so going to own the Technorati and iTunes Top 10.” (And I’ve heard them say this.) Sorry, but if you want to sit up on high and keep pushing your content out at the “great unwashed masses”, YouTube, CraigsList and their successors are so gonna own your asses.

This is not about changing your content management system. You’ve already sunk a lot of cash into those. This is about changing your culture. What do blogs allow you to do that you don’t already do?

  1. Blogs can get you closer to your audience

    And that’s exactly where you need to be. I met Robert Scoble at a Geek Dinner here in London last summer, and he talked about having a conversation with his customers on how Microsoft could better serve their needs. I don’t really understand when journalists moved away from their audience, but many people have that impression.
  2. Blogs can bring new voices to your journalism

    Since when did journalism become a game of pick the pundit? It’s lazy, and it’s turned a lot of journalism into a talking shop amongst pundits, politicians and other journalists. Google yourself some new voices. In the last year, blogs have helped me bring serving soldiers in Iraq onto programmes, helped me hear from a Saudi teenager calling for women’s right to vote and let me eavesdrop in on a guy’s thoughts as he left New Orleans to escape Katrina.
  3. Blogs can get you closer to the story

    Blogs and a world of tools that have grown up around them make creating multimedia stories in the field easier than ever. I’m an online journalist because I believe that the internet is a revolutionary medium. I can do better journalism with blogging tools: Real, raw and in the field, while being in constant contact with my audience. What do they want to know? What questions do they have for the people I’m interviewing?
  4. Blogs could just re-invigorate western democracy

    OK, OK, maybe I’m getting a little carried away. But I’m still an idealist at heart. That’s one of the reasons I got into journalism. Steve Yelvington, who really should be in your RSS reader, put it this way recently:

    1. The end of mass media. Here’s what the 20the century gave us: A population of consumers whose economic role was to eat what they’re served and pay up. These “people formerly known as the audience” are alienated, disengaged and angry. Instead of setting our sights on building a nation of shopkeepers, bankers and passive consumers, what if we set our sights on building a nation of participants in cultural and civic life? Perhaps this world where everyone can be a publisher will not be such a bad place.

And as Steve says a few days later in his blog, there isn’t a silver bullet, and I’m not going to try to sell blogs as one. But Steve told me in Florida a year ago that blogs represent a complex set of social behaviours that we’re just understanding. Blogs are just the tip of the ice berg in this fast moving world of participatory media. Blogging and the mainstream media has to be more than ‘me-too-ism’, and it can be. With a little thought to understand these new behaviours and a willingness to actually accept and adapt to these changes instead of wishing they weren’t happening, we might just have a chance.

technorati tags:, ,

Monday, September 18th, 2006

The future of TV?

Posted by Kevin Anderson

After talking at IBC last Sunday, I’ve been thinking about TV, which isn’t something that I do much. My information diet is a lot like my friend Ian at CubicGarden: I watch a lot of video, just not a lot of TV. Suw and I didn’t even have a TV until recently when we bought EyeTV from Elgato, great little USB gizmo that not only allows us to watch Freeview over-the-air digital television but it also has some great scheduling and PVR features And like Ian, I use a lot of tools to shift through all the information out there: RSS readers, online aggregators and as Ian puts it “an offline social network”. Here’s a little walk through his day:

My home workstation automatically downloads, podcasts, video, everything.It then syncs the latest content with my laptop and I manually copystuff to my mobile phone’s flash card.

The video content is a real mix of mainstream content like Lost, DailyShow, Simpsons, etc, and content from the net (such as Hak.5, CommandN,etc) mixed in. We tend to just pick and choose depending on our moods.

The problem that I have with TV, as it stands, is that it adds content without providing me with tools to sort through it. There just hasn’t been that much intelligence in TV. My computer helps me filter through all the information I need to know. TV doesn’t. Or maybe doesn’t right now. It doesn’t have to be that way. Tom Coates wrote in a brilliant post: Social software to set-top boxes:

Imagine a buddy-list on your television that you could bring onto yourscreen with the merest tap of a ‘friends’ key on your remote control.The buddy list would be the first stage of an interface that would letyou add and remove friends, and see what your friends are watching inreal-time - whether they be watching live television or somethingstored on their PVRs.

Recommendation of information and entertainment from friends and professional contacts is increasingly important to my media habits. The television industry understands this. I saw a demo of what is now only a mockup of possible future features in set top boxes by one of the companies that makes middleware for them, OpenTV. For one, the interface was a lot more intelligent. It reminded me of some of the animation effects of the new Core animation effects in Mac OS 10.5. The visual animation showed other content that was related to what you were watching either on other channels or on the hard drive of you set top box. But what really caught my eye was that you could also see related content from friends or from video sharing sites on the internet, like YouTube.

Also, things the Tom envisioned such as webcams to chat with your friends while watching TV are already a reality. Philips was demoing set-top boxes with USB inputs for webcams.

More intelligence is coming to television. Set-top boxes are going to rival computers running media centre software for capabilities. Real interactivity might be coming to television. For too long, both the television industry and online content providers have abused the term interactivity. I don’t want to press buttons and interact with a box. I want to interact with my friends.

But so far this was just a demo. I asked how they planned to bridge social networks and cable networks. Right now, they don’t know. Electronic programmer’s guides have a lot of text data. But what about pulling in data from RSS feeds for video blogs or even from mainstream video sources? What about pulling in tags from the internet and other metadata? Right now, there isn’t any way to bridge those worlds.

Maybe it will happen when IPTV becomes a reality. That was another theme at IBC, and all you have to do is look a the headlines this week to realise that TV networks are coming back to the internet. NBC launches the National Broadband Company, and ABC and CBS are both offering more programming online). And computer companies are coming into your living room. Apple previews iTV. (Hey, it’s news that Apple actually previews anything!) More intelligence is coming to TV. Well, at least the technology.

technorati tags:, ,

Wednesday, September 13th, 2006

Wikipedia vs Britannica: Yawn

Posted by Suw Charman-Anderson

So Jimmy Wales from Wikipedia and Dale Hoiberg from Britannica slug it out in the Wall Street Journal. Both miss the point.

Wikipedia will remain the canonical reference source for the internet for as long as Britannica remains a paid-for service. When Britannica makes its content freely accessible to the public, and is one of the sites that can be directly searched from your browser, the way that Wikipedia is from Firefox, then we may see a shift. But until then, we the public cannot compare and contrast the content of the two services, and we cannot make up our own minds as to whether we prefer Wikipedia over Britannica or not.

So all this debate over open and closed models is no more than blowing hot air. Wikipedia wins not because it is more accurate or more inclusive or written by more people or has expert contributors. All that is irrelevant. It wins because it’s free.

(Link via Euan.)

Sunday, September 10th, 2006

Blogging IBC in Amsterdam

Posted by Kevin Anderson

I’m in Amstedam at the massive IBC broadcast conference to give a talk about blogging and breaking news. While I’m waiting to give my talk, I’m of course blogging about the conference over at 5Live’s Pods and Blogs blog. I’ve found a WiFi video phone that I want for Christmas, and I’m on the hunt for the Swiss Army knife of moblogging gear. When I get back to London, I’ve got a few posts to write here on Strange Attractor including: TV as a social media? Discuss.