Today I pitched three stories. Two of the stories came through people contacting me on Twitter and the third was from a caller who actually called a couple weeks ago. I was contacted by the first Twitter story last week and the second was brought to my attention just last night.
I knew when I received a phone call from a gentleman who, along with community members and a public school system had established a community garden, that this was worthy of a story. I wrote it up immediately and filed it in several future day files in hopes it would be read and picked as a story. It wasn't picked, but I honestly knew it wouldn't be picked without a voice, me, actually bugging the producers.
The story that came from Twitter last week was followed quickly by emails from other viewers upset about the same issue. I compiled all of this information and even pitched the story while I was home from work. I sent the station direct messages on Twitter during the afternoon editorial meeting. It wasn't picked. I'm the only one truly used to being pitched stories via Twitter. I wasn't surprised it wasn't picked and knew I needed to actually speak to the producers.
The story that came from Twitter last night I kept to myself until today and pitched it in the afternoon editorial meeting along with the two others. I knew only one of the three would actually be a fit for today, but I knew the other two would be great stories for the weekend. Today though all the producers I needed to talk to were in the meeting. Plus, I make the pitch and get the managers excited about the stories and voila I'm given the green light to set the stories up.
It's honestly a game where I need to know whose playing and what positions are open and need to be filled. I find a story that I know will eventually fit into one of these openings for one of these players, I hold onto it and pitch it when the playbook calls for a curve ball. (Yeah, that's the best analogy I can do at the moment! lol!)
This is how I function in the newsroom to get stories covered that may be overlooked if they don't have a voice. I can't imagine what it's like to be the PR professional who isn't aware of the playbook. We are being asked to do more in the newsroom with fewer resources. You may have the producer or the reporter that you can talk to, but often they don't know the whole game plan either.
All of these stories got my individual attention because I happened to be the one to answer the phone and I'm the one who is now being pitched stories via Twitter. I liked what I heard and knew the stories fit into the stations brand of news. I know how to play the game to get stories covered. I think it's a win-win situation for everyone involved.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Thursday, May 21, 2009
After thoughts on PR & Media in a New Media World
This week I was a panel speaker at a seminar on PR & Media in a New Media World hosted by Mile High Social Media Club. The panel guests also included Elaine Ellis of Metzger Associates and Jason Kintzler founder and CEO of PitchEngine. The seminar was attended by mostly PR professionals and bloggers who submitted questions for the panel to answer.
I was honestly surprised to hear the public relation field is working to figure out the purpose and uses for social media just as media outlets are doing. What didn't surprise me is how differently everyone thinks of social media. Which in itself is what social media is because social media is whatever you want it to be. The one clear belief I have is that social media is to be used with a plan, strategy and goal. Even if you use social media to connect with friends or family or to make friends, that should be your only purpose on that social media platform. For example I have a Facebook page that I have to keep in touch with friends and family. I am very selective on who I accept as as a friend. Twitter I use to relate my job in the newsroom and to share news with those who interact with me. These are truly separate uses of the platforms, i.e. my strategies.
One question we were asked was, is it traditional media and social media, or just media? My answer: media. For me media is the tool that is used as the news conduit. Whether that is through a social media platform or a written article or live newscast it is all media. I also don't think that if traditional media outlets view social media platforms as completely separate and different from themselves, social media platforms may never be truly embraced and used.
This is why I liked this morning while viewing all of the Twitter chatter on the seminar, #MHSMC, I saw that @Tajmo proposed that we just use a new term: Social Relations. For me, this encompasses what social media is and does in all ways that is is used. I use it to further my relations with my friends and family. I use it to create relations with community members who could watch CBS4 News or log onto CBS4Denver.com. Whatever your business is, if you are able to create a relationship with someone who never or rarely uses your product, that person may soon try you out.
Another question we were asked is what is the value of the traditional press release? I was the only one of the panelists who said, yes there is still value in the traditional press release. Why? I am an anomaly in the news business. Very few others work the way I do in social media. I may prefer to be pitched stories via social media platforms, but my coworkers who are still figuring out social media, still expect the traditional press release. The newsroom still receives faxed press releases. It's true!
When I joined CBS4 News in 2000 we received hundreds a faxes every day that were filed in daily/monthly folders for planning purposes. Now those files sit primarily empty, as we now receive hundreds a emails that are filed in our computer system. In a world where we still have folders and faxes, the traditional press release still has value. Yes, this will change to social media pitches as it did from faxes to emails, but it has not changed yet.
I learned a lot during the seminar and hope those who attended took away some insights and talking points as well.
I was honestly surprised to hear the public relation field is working to figure out the purpose and uses for social media just as media outlets are doing. What didn't surprise me is how differently everyone thinks of social media. Which in itself is what social media is because social media is whatever you want it to be. The one clear belief I have is that social media is to be used with a plan, strategy and goal. Even if you use social media to connect with friends or family or to make friends, that should be your only purpose on that social media platform. For example I have a Facebook page that I have to keep in touch with friends and family. I am very selective on who I accept as as a friend. Twitter I use to relate my job in the newsroom and to share news with those who interact with me. These are truly separate uses of the platforms, i.e. my strategies.
One question we were asked was, is it traditional media and social media, or just media? My answer: media. For me media is the tool that is used as the news conduit. Whether that is through a social media platform or a written article or live newscast it is all media. I also don't think that if traditional media outlets view social media platforms as completely separate and different from themselves, social media platforms may never be truly embraced and used.
This is why I liked this morning while viewing all of the Twitter chatter on the seminar, #MHSMC, I saw that @Tajmo proposed that we just use a new term: Social Relations. For me, this encompasses what social media is and does in all ways that is is used. I use it to further my relations with my friends and family. I use it to create relations with community members who could watch CBS4 News or log onto CBS4Denver.com. Whatever your business is, if you are able to create a relationship with someone who never or rarely uses your product, that person may soon try you out.
Another question we were asked is what is the value of the traditional press release? I was the only one of the panelists who said, yes there is still value in the traditional press release. Why? I am an anomaly in the news business. Very few others work the way I do in social media. I may prefer to be pitched stories via social media platforms, but my coworkers who are still figuring out social media, still expect the traditional press release. The newsroom still receives faxed press releases. It's true!
When I joined CBS4 News in 2000 we received hundreds a faxes every day that were filed in daily/monthly folders for planning purposes. Now those files sit primarily empty, as we now receive hundreds a emails that are filed in our computer system. In a world where we still have folders and faxes, the traditional press release still has value. Yes, this will change to social media pitches as it did from faxes to emails, but it has not changed yet.
I learned a lot during the seminar and hope those who attended took away some insights and talking points as well.
Social media opens the door
Below is the article I wrote for an upcoming NATAS newsletter. The purpose of the article is to introduce social media to the NATAS member that may be thinking of using social media. Tell me your thoughts.
Social media may not be a necessity. Social media, at this time, may not drastically change viewership numbers. Social media, however, will give you or your organization another voice in a world where turning on the television is not always the first action people take to find news. Social media is a tool that can be used to connect your brand with the community. Social media can be a resource to find information.
When you make the decision to utilize social media, which ranges on many platforms such as blogs, vlogs, Twitter, Facebook and Myspace, have a goal or a strategy. Social media is whatever you make it to be. CBS4 News, KCNC-TV in Denver, CO utilizes social media to achieve advocacy, transparency and interactivity. The goal is to connect our brand of empowering, insightful, relevant news with our community.
Many people in the newsroom, and even in other departments at the station, are able to contribute to the CBS4 News Facebook Fan Page and the Twitter account @cbs4denver. The experiences and knowledge of the many lend credibility to the social media platforms that are used. One example of this is when Medical Editor Dr. Dave Hnida logs into Twitter, announces he’s there to answer your medical questions and then converses with those on Twitter who submit questions.
Social media can also open new avenues for the way stories are told. CBS4 News was the first news station to partner with a local hospital, Presbyterian Saint Luke’s Medical Center, to Tweet live during a pediatric operation. Dr. Hnida was able to share on Twitter what was happening live in the operating room. Digital photographs taken during the operation were also posted on Twitter. Those who followed the surgery were literally in the operation room with Dr. Hnida and were able to have immediate answers to questions or concerns they submitted via Twitter. This was not just a social media story only available via Twitter. CBS4 News covered the Twitter surgery as a news story that was incorporated into several of the newscasts.
CBS4 News uses Twitter to share what’s happening in the newsroom and in the editorial meetings. Comments and suggestions are welcome and encouraged. Many stories have been found this way. Many interviews the reporters need to accomplish their stories have been found through using social media. This also opens the station to a new way for public relation professionals and individuals to pitch stories. At the same time another avenue to receive criticism is opened. By communicating in the social media platforms and addressing any critiques openly CBS4 News is creating trust within the community. Doors that seemed to be closed to community members are now wide open for them to be involved and vested in the station. When community members participate in discussions they feel like they are a part of the news process and when in the past they may have never turned on CBS4 News, now they do. Some now watch to see if the station has followed through on decisions made during discussions, and even more so to see if their own ideas, comments, submissions were aired in a newscast.
There were a series of April snow storms where community members submitted photographs, videos and information about weather conditions on several social media platforms Twitter, Facebook and YouReport on www.cbs4denver.com. The station acknowledged the help from the community and aired several of the shared items. Credit was given by naming and thanking those whose items were aired live during the news. Another example of involving the social media community during news coverage is when CBS4 News asks for people to chat with the anchors during live instant message sessions and asks what questions they want answered on specific stories. For example questions that were submitted were asked at press conferences regarding swine flu and asked during post game coverage of the Nuggest's during the playoffs.
As social media evolves, so will CBS4 News' use of social media. The advice I can share for any media organization using or wanting to use social media is to first and foremost have a plan, a goal, a strategy. If you need a strategy to accomplish the goals you have for using social media, then develop that plan and communicate clearly to those in your organization that will be utilizing social media. You need to understand each social media platform is different and people use them differently. For example, Twitter has a fast pace and many conversations happen at once; whereas Facebook is slower paced and not necessarily a conversation. CBS4 News may post dozens of Tweeets in one day but only posts two or three updates on Facebook. Finally, when people follow or friend your organization on social media platforms those people have now invited you into their homes. Imagine yourself as the dinner guest at a party and behave as such. People who use social media expect an open door. You will not receive a friendly response if you just push your message at the dinner party and walk out slamming the door as you leave.
Social media may not be a necessity. Social media, at this time, may not drastically change viewership numbers. Social media, however, will give you or your organization another voice in a world where turning on the television is not always the first action people take to find news. Social media is a tool that can be used to connect your brand with the community. Social media can be a resource to find information.
When you make the decision to utilize social media, which ranges on many platforms such as blogs, vlogs, Twitter, Facebook and Myspace, have a goal or a strategy. Social media is whatever you make it to be. CBS4 News, KCNC-TV in Denver, CO utilizes social media to achieve advocacy, transparency and interactivity. The goal is to connect our brand of empowering, insightful, relevant news with our community.
Many people in the newsroom, and even in other departments at the station, are able to contribute to the CBS4 News Facebook Fan Page and the Twitter account @cbs4denver. The experiences and knowledge of the many lend credibility to the social media platforms that are used. One example of this is when Medical Editor Dr. Dave Hnida logs into Twitter, announces he’s there to answer your medical questions and then converses with those on Twitter who submit questions.
Social media can also open new avenues for the way stories are told. CBS4 News was the first news station to partner with a local hospital, Presbyterian Saint Luke’s Medical Center, to Tweet live during a pediatric operation. Dr. Hnida was able to share on Twitter what was happening live in the operating room. Digital photographs taken during the operation were also posted on Twitter. Those who followed the surgery were literally in the operation room with Dr. Hnida and were able to have immediate answers to questions or concerns they submitted via Twitter. This was not just a social media story only available via Twitter. CBS4 News covered the Twitter surgery as a news story that was incorporated into several of the newscasts.
CBS4 News uses Twitter to share what’s happening in the newsroom and in the editorial meetings. Comments and suggestions are welcome and encouraged. Many stories have been found this way. Many interviews the reporters need to accomplish their stories have been found through using social media. This also opens the station to a new way for public relation professionals and individuals to pitch stories. At the same time another avenue to receive criticism is opened. By communicating in the social media platforms and addressing any critiques openly CBS4 News is creating trust within the community. Doors that seemed to be closed to community members are now wide open for them to be involved and vested in the station. When community members participate in discussions they feel like they are a part of the news process and when in the past they may have never turned on CBS4 News, now they do. Some now watch to see if the station has followed through on decisions made during discussions, and even more so to see if their own ideas, comments, submissions were aired in a newscast.
There were a series of April snow storms where community members submitted photographs, videos and information about weather conditions on several social media platforms Twitter, Facebook and YouReport on www.cbs4denver.com. The station acknowledged the help from the community and aired several of the shared items. Credit was given by naming and thanking those whose items were aired live during the news. Another example of involving the social media community during news coverage is when CBS4 News asks for people to chat with the anchors during live instant message sessions and asks what questions they want answered on specific stories. For example questions that were submitted were asked at press conferences regarding swine flu and asked during post game coverage of the Nuggest's during the playoffs.
As social media evolves, so will CBS4 News' use of social media. The advice I can share for any media organization using or wanting to use social media is to first and foremost have a plan, a goal, a strategy. If you need a strategy to accomplish the goals you have for using social media, then develop that plan and communicate clearly to those in your organization that will be utilizing social media. You need to understand each social media platform is different and people use them differently. For example, Twitter has a fast pace and many conversations happen at once; whereas Facebook is slower paced and not necessarily a conversation. CBS4 News may post dozens of Tweeets in one day but only posts two or three updates on Facebook. Finally, when people follow or friend your organization on social media platforms those people have now invited you into their homes. Imagine yourself as the dinner guest at a party and behave as such. People who use social media expect an open door. You will not receive a friendly response if you just push your message at the dinner party and walk out slamming the door as you leave.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Lost Twitter follower due to misunderstanding
As with any form of communication there are multiple opportunities for misunderstanding. I believe a misunderstanding lead to someone following me on Twitter to un-follow me. Instead of asking me about what I meant, the follower decided to call me out on Twitter and to un-follow me. I admit it's hard not to take this personally.
Last night I left work while there was an active shooting in Greeley. There was nothing more that I could do. A freelance photographer was on the scene. The Under Sheriff had been paged to call with information on the situation. I couldn't even hear what was happening because none of the scanners were picking up the Weld County Sheriff's Department.
I posted this Tweet:
"Okay.. really don't like not being able to hear an incident where 4 people have been shot...none of the 11 scanners on the desk R getting it."
I logged into Twitter this afternoon to find this @ reply from someone who had been following me:
"Perhaps experts busy saving lives? "Unfollow U." RT @MistyMontano: don't like not hear(ing)..4..shot...none of...11 scanners..R getting it"
I checked, the person had stopped following me after he sent that Tweet.
I deal with opinions and comments all day at the station via phone and email. Read my post from today "Thank you, I'll pass your comment along" to get a glimpse of the type of calls I answer. At least over the phone I have the opportunity to explain decisions, statements or what-not.
In this case I sent two @ replies, 15-hours after I'd received his Tweet comment. (Yes, I said 15-HOURS! Once I logged off last night, I didn't log in until I came back into work today. I spent the morning outside!)
I sent:
"What? RT @(soandso): Perhaps experts busy saving lives? "Unfollow U." RT @MistyMontano: don't like not hear(ing)..4..shot...none of... ..."
"@(soandso) I definitely didn't mean any emergency responders should be speaking to me... I meant I wished scanners received more channels"
He never replied. I was never able to explain what I'd meant. He passed judgment and quit communicating.
If he'd responded I would have told him what had happened last night. If after that he still chose to un-follow, then fine. Then at least he'd have made an educated decision.
So I'm going to explain myself now.
If you review my Twitter stream regarding the Greeley shooting you'll see I was frustrated that I couldn't get any information. Information doesn't just come from dispatchers and emergency crews on scenes. Often the emergency crews are too busy to respond to me. I understand that.
While we won't go on the air with unconfirmed scanner chatter, listening to the scanner helps me gather information. This is information I use to help the news crews in the field by keeping them up to date on police activity. I want to keep my crews safe as much as I want to get the story. Most importantly, and every journalist should agree with me, news crews need to stay out of the way of emergency responder activity. Many times I hear on the scanner where the media staging area is long before I get it through official sources. I'm able to move my crew to that area, which is safe and out of the way, faster than if I were to wait for a call back.
When I sent my Tweet I was sharing my frustration that I COULDN'T HELP AT ALL. I feel so helpless in these times. A photographer was on the scene and I was useless.
In any way did my original Tweet imply I was trying to interrupt police activity? I truly don't understand how such a harsh judgment was passed. As I said, all forms of communication, even Twitter, can lead to misunderstanding. Perhaps Twitter is more susceptible to such misunderstanding because it's so fast and short with only 140 characters. As a journalist this is something to always keep in mind. It is important to be as clear and possible in hopes to never mislead. If that happens too much, then trust is lost.
Last night I left work while there was an active shooting in Greeley. There was nothing more that I could do. A freelance photographer was on the scene. The Under Sheriff had been paged to call with information on the situation. I couldn't even hear what was happening because none of the scanners were picking up the Weld County Sheriff's Department.
I posted this Tweet:
"Okay.. really don't like not being able to hear an incident where 4 people have been shot...none of the 11 scanners on the desk R getting it."
I logged into Twitter this afternoon to find this @ reply from someone who had been following me:
"Perhaps experts busy saving lives? "Unfollow U." RT @MistyMontano: don't like not hear(ing)..4..shot...none of...11 scanners..R getting it"
I checked, the person had stopped following me after he sent that Tweet.
I deal with opinions and comments all day at the station via phone and email. Read my post from today "Thank you, I'll pass your comment along" to get a glimpse of the type of calls I answer. At least over the phone I have the opportunity to explain decisions, statements or what-not.
In this case I sent two @ replies, 15-hours after I'd received his Tweet comment. (Yes, I said 15-HOURS! Once I logged off last night, I didn't log in until I came back into work today. I spent the morning outside!)
I sent:
"What? RT @(soandso): Perhaps experts busy saving lives? "Unfollow U." RT @MistyMontano: don't like not hear(ing)..4..shot...none of... ..."
"@(soandso) I definitely didn't mean any emergency responders should be speaking to me... I meant I wished scanners received more channels"
He never replied. I was never able to explain what I'd meant. He passed judgment and quit communicating.
If he'd responded I would have told him what had happened last night. If after that he still chose to un-follow, then fine. Then at least he'd have made an educated decision.
So I'm going to explain myself now.
If you review my Twitter stream regarding the Greeley shooting you'll see I was frustrated that I couldn't get any information. Information doesn't just come from dispatchers and emergency crews on scenes. Often the emergency crews are too busy to respond to me. I understand that.
While we won't go on the air with unconfirmed scanner chatter, listening to the scanner helps me gather information. This is information I use to help the news crews in the field by keeping them up to date on police activity. I want to keep my crews safe as much as I want to get the story. Most importantly, and every journalist should agree with me, news crews need to stay out of the way of emergency responder activity. Many times I hear on the scanner where the media staging area is long before I get it through official sources. I'm able to move my crew to that area, which is safe and out of the way, faster than if I were to wait for a call back.
When I sent my Tweet I was sharing my frustration that I COULDN'T HELP AT ALL. I feel so helpless in these times. A photographer was on the scene and I was useless.
In any way did my original Tweet imply I was trying to interrupt police activity? I truly don't understand how such a harsh judgment was passed. As I said, all forms of communication, even Twitter, can lead to misunderstanding. Perhaps Twitter is more susceptible to such misunderstanding because it's so fast and short with only 140 characters. As a journalist this is something to always keep in mind. It is important to be as clear and possible in hopes to never mislead. If that happens too much, then trust is lost.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
I kept a SECRET from Twitter
As I opened this new post I started to monitor a fire west of the station, over 20-minutes away, in Jefferson County. I entered the title and stopped writing to focus on the fire. I checked all sources that could possibly also be monitoring the fire and found none. Not knowing if I'm the only assignment editor in the city listening to the fire, I had to decide what, if anything, to post on Twitter. I chose to post nothing at first.
This was the right decision. For less than ten minutes I listened to the difficulties the fire crews were having: downed power lines, burned out stairway, etc. Then I heard, "one suspect in custody, request police assistance." At that I immediately shouted out to the producers that this is a fire we need to cover. In minutes I had a photographer out the door and editors on stand-by to help out with other stories being put together for the 10pm news. My goal was to have coverage of this fire and to have two reporter live shots in the 10pm.
Still there was nothing I could find on this fire. It was possible that I was the only desk moving to cover this fire. I couldn't put anything out on Twitter that gave this information to competing media.
Finally I posted this Tweet: "just when I thought we'd reached breaking news quota: West Metro Fire PIO confirms active structure fire.Crews having hard time accessing it"
I chose to Tweet because I had confirmed information, but I didn't give too much information away. I had the location of the fire. I confirmed a suspect was in custody. Also, the photographer was well on his way to the scene. If there was anything exclusive to get on the fire, we were in good shape.
At 8:28pm the media pager, and @scancolorado on Twitter, sent alerts on the fire. I also sent a Tweet with more information, but no more information than what these sources had. I'm almost sure every station in the city uses the media pager. I knew I no longer had this on my own, but I still had more details than the alerts sent out. At 8:46pm another media page came out giving the correct address of the fire. I followed with another Tweet adding that information for anyone following me. I still kept other details to myself.
Then I saw it. A 9pm newscast on another network had a live report on the fire. At that point I put out all I had confirmed and heard on the scanner on Twitter.
I think about news integrity and exclusivity all the time when I post.
There was no thought to the real SECRET I kept from Twitter today, though. Around 4pm I answered a phone call from the Denver Police Public Information Officer, "Misty, who's in charge of the newsroom today? Is Wieland (news director) there?" I knew then something was up. As the news director hung up the phone, I was called into his office. I found out one of the news crews had literally walked into the middle of a SWAT situation.
The reporter had apparently just called and spoken to the executive producer and said that a plain-clothes detective stopped them and told them they were in the line of fire and needed to move to safety. The crew was following a homicide investigation from four days ago. They were headed to the crime scene, a 7-11 when they were stopped. Police wouldn't confirm it, but said SWAT was near on a possible connection to the homicide.
We didn't need any more than that to know what could possibly unfold. First priority was to move the crew to safety. Second priority was to get a live truck to the scene. What was not a priority was Twitter. In the rush of movement and preparation for possible breaking news I even said jokingly, "this is NOT something we Twitter!"
Joking or not, it was the absolute truth. We were the only media with the information. SWAT moved us to a specific location so not to bust their cover. Beyond protecting exclusive news, we had to think of the safety of the SWAT team who was moving in on an unsuspecting, possibly armed, suspect.
Even after the arrest happened and the crew shot video of the suspect in custody, I waited to Tweet until I knew we'd get the reporter on live during the 6:30pm newscast. I was still protecting exclusivity. Then, I found out a photographer from another station, on his way home from work, noticed the road block so he also shot video of the suspect! ARGH! Still, I wouldn't have changed anything knowing this.
One other conscious decision I made was to continue to Tweet other news, other conversations, just so I wasn't SILENT on Twitter to where it would be noticed. I have been asked before by followers where I am when I don't Twitter, or if I'm doing okay because I haven't sent many Tweets. So I know even my silence says something, and I have to be aware of that as well!
I can't tell you what a relief it was to Tweet about the situation when I could. I'd been on the news desk ready to move crews if needed and concerned for safety of everyone involved. I wanted to share, but I had to keep a SECRET from Twitter!
This was the right decision. For less than ten minutes I listened to the difficulties the fire crews were having: downed power lines, burned out stairway, etc. Then I heard, "one suspect in custody, request police assistance." At that I immediately shouted out to the producers that this is a fire we need to cover. In minutes I had a photographer out the door and editors on stand-by to help out with other stories being put together for the 10pm news. My goal was to have coverage of this fire and to have two reporter live shots in the 10pm.
Still there was nothing I could find on this fire. It was possible that I was the only desk moving to cover this fire. I couldn't put anything out on Twitter that gave this information to competing media.
Finally I posted this Tweet: "just when I thought we'd reached breaking news quota: West Metro Fire PIO confirms active structure fire.Crews having hard time accessing it"
I chose to Tweet because I had confirmed information, but I didn't give too much information away. I had the location of the fire. I confirmed a suspect was in custody. Also, the photographer was well on his way to the scene. If there was anything exclusive to get on the fire, we were in good shape.
At 8:28pm the media pager, and @scancolorado on Twitter, sent alerts on the fire. I also sent a Tweet with more information, but no more information than what these sources had. I'm almost sure every station in the city uses the media pager. I knew I no longer had this on my own, but I still had more details than the alerts sent out. At 8:46pm another media page came out giving the correct address of the fire. I followed with another Tweet adding that information for anyone following me. I still kept other details to myself.
Then I saw it. A 9pm newscast on another network had a live report on the fire. At that point I put out all I had confirmed and heard on the scanner on Twitter.
I think about news integrity and exclusivity all the time when I post.
There was no thought to the real SECRET I kept from Twitter today, though. Around 4pm I answered a phone call from the Denver Police Public Information Officer, "Misty, who's in charge of the newsroom today? Is Wieland (news director) there?" I knew then something was up. As the news director hung up the phone, I was called into his office. I found out one of the news crews had literally walked into the middle of a SWAT situation.
The reporter had apparently just called and spoken to the executive producer and said that a plain-clothes detective stopped them and told them they were in the line of fire and needed to move to safety. The crew was following a homicide investigation from four days ago. They were headed to the crime scene, a 7-11 when they were stopped. Police wouldn't confirm it, but said SWAT was near on a possible connection to the homicide.
We didn't need any more than that to know what could possibly unfold. First priority was to move the crew to safety. Second priority was to get a live truck to the scene. What was not a priority was Twitter. In the rush of movement and preparation for possible breaking news I even said jokingly, "this is NOT something we Twitter!"
Joking or not, it was the absolute truth. We were the only media with the information. SWAT moved us to a specific location so not to bust their cover. Beyond protecting exclusive news, we had to think of the safety of the SWAT team who was moving in on an unsuspecting, possibly armed, suspect.
Even after the arrest happened and the crew shot video of the suspect in custody, I waited to Tweet until I knew we'd get the reporter on live during the 6:30pm newscast. I was still protecting exclusivity. Then, I found out a photographer from another station, on his way home from work, noticed the road block so he also shot video of the suspect! ARGH! Still, I wouldn't have changed anything knowing this.
One other conscious decision I made was to continue to Tweet other news, other conversations, just so I wasn't SILENT on Twitter to where it would be noticed. I have been asked before by followers where I am when I don't Twitter, or if I'm doing okay because I haven't sent many Tweets. So I know even my silence says something, and I have to be aware of that as well!
I can't tell you what a relief it was to Tweet about the situation when I could. I'd been on the news desk ready to move crews if needed and concerned for safety of everyone involved. I wanted to share, but I had to keep a SECRET from Twitter!
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Tweet critique
Tonight I received my first Tweet critique from a follower. He stated, "Too many RT's that aren't relevant to News, I'd like to keep following you but there are too many twits for me." I promptly sent a reply thanking him for letting me know this.
Luckily, he hadn't unfollowed me yet so I sent him a direct message saying, "seriously, thank you for being honest with me. I'm still learning my place as a journalist on twitter. I understand if you no longer follow." This is complete honesty. I find myself struggling at times of defining who I am on Twitter, always aware of my journalistic integrities, and trying to combine them with my goals I hope to achieve by using social media.
I received a reply to my direct message that explained his position on my tweets. I asked questions in return to get specifics on his concerns. I thanked him for chatting with me and told him I would keep his comments in mind as I continue to use Twitter.
I've set my identity on Twitter to be: a person with a job and a life following me on Twitter, but I happen to be a journalist who works at a TV station in Denver. I share tweets about myself and I tweet about news, working in news, working in news at CBS4 News. I'm curious, am I seen first as a journalist or as just another person by those following me?
This is where I find myself struggling at times. I have made friends with people on Twitter. We have conversations, some related to news, some not. When possible I try to bring news back into the conversations. I have people following me just for my news tweets.
The critique tonight said he didn't mind my non-news tweets, but that the way I answer tweets and the re-tweets of @cbs4denver and @skyjosh get hard to follow. I can understand being overwhelmed by tweets when I re-tweet either @cbs4denver or @skyjosh because then he's receiving the same tweets twice. However there are many Colorado viewers who follow me but don't follow both or either @cbs4denver or @skyjosh. When I re-tweet those posts, my goal is to get the most information out to the most people.
As for how I answer or comment to tweets, it's my opinion since I'm a journalist trying to be open, when possible, I re-tweet the posts and post my comments or answers so all can see what I'm responding to. More often than not I put my answer in the re-tweet so I don't have to send out multiple tweets.
Tonight I responded to a tweet asking if boys will ever grow out of burping and farting jokes. This is something I ask almost daily as a step-mother of two boys. (I'm starting to accept I will never understand boy humor!) This tweet received several responses. I re-tweeted these responses to show the complete conversation. It was also me relating to people as a regular person, not just a news person.
It was right after this I received the tweet critique. I really do understand. Did I cross a line? Did I go to far? These are good questions. I'm glad I was able to chat with the person who sent the critique. I thank him for being open with me.
This kind of critique is something other Tweople don't have to pay attention to if they don't want. But, as I am a journalist trying to be open in how I use social media, I open myself to these kinds of critiques and discussions.
Luckily, he hadn't unfollowed me yet so I sent him a direct message saying, "seriously, thank you for being honest with me. I'm still learning my place as a journalist on twitter. I understand if you no longer follow." This is complete honesty. I find myself struggling at times of defining who I am on Twitter, always aware of my journalistic integrities, and trying to combine them with my goals I hope to achieve by using social media.
I received a reply to my direct message that explained his position on my tweets. I asked questions in return to get specifics on his concerns. I thanked him for chatting with me and told him I would keep his comments in mind as I continue to use Twitter.
I've set my identity on Twitter to be: a person with a job and a life following me on Twitter, but I happen to be a journalist who works at a TV station in Denver. I share tweets about myself and I tweet about news, working in news, working in news at CBS4 News. I'm curious, am I seen first as a journalist or as just another person by those following me?
This is where I find myself struggling at times. I have made friends with people on Twitter. We have conversations, some related to news, some not. When possible I try to bring news back into the conversations. I have people following me just for my news tweets.
The critique tonight said he didn't mind my non-news tweets, but that the way I answer tweets and the re-tweets of @cbs4denver and @skyjosh get hard to follow. I can understand being overwhelmed by tweets when I re-tweet either @cbs4denver or @skyjosh because then he's receiving the same tweets twice. However there are many Colorado viewers who follow me but don't follow both or either @cbs4denver or @skyjosh. When I re-tweet those posts, my goal is to get the most information out to the most people.
As for how I answer or comment to tweets, it's my opinion since I'm a journalist trying to be open, when possible, I re-tweet the posts and post my comments or answers so all can see what I'm responding to. More often than not I put my answer in the re-tweet so I don't have to send out multiple tweets.
Tonight I responded to a tweet asking if boys will ever grow out of burping and farting jokes. This is something I ask almost daily as a step-mother of two boys. (I'm starting to accept I will never understand boy humor!) This tweet received several responses. I re-tweeted these responses to show the complete conversation. It was also me relating to people as a regular person, not just a news person.
It was right after this I received the tweet critique. I really do understand. Did I cross a line? Did I go to far? These are good questions. I'm glad I was able to chat with the person who sent the critique. I thank him for being open with me.
This kind of critique is something other Tweople don't have to pay attention to if they don't want. But, as I am a journalist trying to be open in how I use social media, I open myself to these kinds of critiques and discussions.
Vanity? Branding? Or?
I'm learning. I hope to always be learning. Currently I'm learning how to incorporate social media into my job as an assignment editor. I truly believe mainstream media will evolve to incorporate and utilize social media. So I jumped right into the action.
If you've been following me on Twitter, @MistyMontano, you know how I've been using Twitter as a journalist. I function between my account and the station's, @cbs4denver, to engage in conversations about stories, to share what it's like to work on the news desk, to provide openess by tweeting during the editorial meetings. The station started tweeting the editorial meetings weeks ago and daily more tweople are joining in the conversation. Soon I will help coach social media sessions for station employees who want to learn and/or get involved. I'm sure the station will continue to evolve.
In my efforts to learn I've talked on the phone with or met with tweople in real life to discuss what I'm doing and to see how they're using social media, mainly Twitter. Rob McNealy, @RobMcNealy, told me he doesn't trust people who don't use their names or those who use nicknames. He advised me I should change my Twitter handle, which was @MsMistyJ at the time. He then told me if I blog, I should have my own domain name. We discussed quite a bit that left me thinking for days. (Thanks Rob!)
I thought about what he said about not trusting those who don't use their full names. Within hours of our meeting I changed my Twitter handle to @MistyMontano. My journalistic goal in using social media is to bring transparency, openess to the media. What Rob said made perfect sense. If I'm going to ask those whom I interact with on any social media platform to trust me, I should use my full name. Shakespeare had this figured out long ago when Juliet said,
Then I meandered through what Rob said about having my own domain where I could share my blog(s). My thoughts often run in tangents, so from thinking of our conversation I moved to bios of reporters and anchors on the station's website. I"m not a public figure like my coworkers, but I now have a voice I didn't have before. It then made sense for me to have my own domain where I could post a bio and host blogs, or anything else I want.
I created www.MistyMontano.com a few days later. Soon after I was contacted by the Mile High Social Media Club and asked if I would be a panelist in an upcoming seminar on social media in PR and the Media. I was asked for a bio. What do you know? I had my own domain sitting empty, so I posted a bio for the organization to use.
Then I looked at my blog, On the News Desk, and decided to move it to my domain. Boy was that disasterous and I'm sure I've lost most, if not all, my followers! Eventually I gave up the fight in trying to make my own blog roll in my website and just linked On the News Desk to my website. In verifying the website and setting up tracking, I also decided to change the domain name of On the News Desk to incorporate my name as well. Now I'm sure if I had any followers left, they've all left running in frustraion!
Next I looked at my blog and saw two distinct topics, adventure stories from the news desk and posts on social media/twitter. I decided to create a second blog, Where mainstream media and social media combine, where I will post my thoughts on social media in mainstream media.
My website is simple. (Mainly because I'm not a website designer! HA!) I'm viewing it as my own watering hole; a place where people who want to know more about me can find it. Why? In trying to achieve openess as a journalist, if I'm going to have this new found voice, people should be able to easily find out who is sharing news adventures with them.
In the end, I guess I'm branding myself, but as what? I can't name it. How about evolving journalist?
And, I admit there's a little vanity and excitement in this for me too.
If you've been following me on Twitter, @MistyMontano, you know how I've been using Twitter as a journalist. I function between my account and the station's, @cbs4denver, to engage in conversations about stories, to share what it's like to work on the news desk, to provide openess by tweeting during the editorial meetings. The station started tweeting the editorial meetings weeks ago and daily more tweople are joining in the conversation. Soon I will help coach social media sessions for station employees who want to learn and/or get involved. I'm sure the station will continue to evolve.
In my efforts to learn I've talked on the phone with or met with tweople in real life to discuss what I'm doing and to see how they're using social media, mainly Twitter. Rob McNealy, @RobMcNealy, told me he doesn't trust people who don't use their names or those who use nicknames. He advised me I should change my Twitter handle, which was @MsMistyJ at the time. He then told me if I blog, I should have my own domain name. We discussed quite a bit that left me thinking for days. (Thanks Rob!)
I thought about what he said about not trusting those who don't use their full names. Within hours of our meeting I changed my Twitter handle to @MistyMontano. My journalistic goal in using social media is to bring transparency, openess to the media. What Rob said made perfect sense. If I'm going to ask those whom I interact with on any social media platform to trust me, I should use my full name. Shakespeare had this figured out long ago when Juliet said,
"What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet."
Then I meandered through what Rob said about having my own domain where I could share my blog(s). My thoughts often run in tangents, so from thinking of our conversation I moved to bios of reporters and anchors on the station's website. I"m not a public figure like my coworkers, but I now have a voice I didn't have before. It then made sense for me to have my own domain where I could post a bio and host blogs, or anything else I want.
I created www.MistyMontano.com a few days later. Soon after I was contacted by the Mile High Social Media Club and asked if I would be a panelist in an upcoming seminar on social media in PR and the Media. I was asked for a bio. What do you know? I had my own domain sitting empty, so I posted a bio for the organization to use.
Then I looked at my blog, On the News Desk, and decided to move it to my domain. Boy was that disasterous and I'm sure I've lost most, if not all, my followers! Eventually I gave up the fight in trying to make my own blog roll in my website and just linked On the News Desk to my website. In verifying the website and setting up tracking, I also decided to change the domain name of On the News Desk to incorporate my name as well. Now I'm sure if I had any followers left, they've all left running in frustraion!
Next I looked at my blog and saw two distinct topics, adventure stories from the news desk and posts on social media/twitter. I decided to create a second blog, Where mainstream media and social media combine, where I will post my thoughts on social media in mainstream media.
My website is simple. (Mainly because I'm not a website designer! HA!) I'm viewing it as my own watering hole; a place where people who want to know more about me can find it. Why? In trying to achieve openess as a journalist, if I'm going to have this new found voice, people should be able to easily find out who is sharing news adventures with them.
In the end, I guess I'm branding myself, but as what? I can't name it. How about evolving journalist?
And, I admit there's a little vanity and excitement in this for me too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
