Big minds from the Big Media and Big Blog worlds have responded to Jay Rosen’s request for feedback on the recent blog conference at Harvard.

Check out the great read here. One of my favourite comments is this one from New York Times Managing Editor Jill Abramson:

The conference left me with a greater appetite than ever to figure out ways that a place like the Times can capture some of the vitality and energy and voice that makes so many blogs so readable and useful, without completely sacrificing the standards that guide our news reporting and editing.

And, finally, while I still have a huge amount to learn about blogs, I wish you guys would try to learn and understand more about traditional journalism– like calling anyone named in a story in a prominent way for comment (even when you are sure your facts are right.) You can be accurate and unfair. I don’t ever want to impose our standards on blogs, but I wish you all at least knew the walk we walk.

I’ve got this theory that many non-journalist bloggers have a greatly simplified view of journalism. Jill’s sentiment suggests we need less antagonism from bloggers directed at journalists, and I agree. If we truly believe journalists and bloggers serve different, complementary functions, then less antagonism and more cooperation can only be a good thing.

(link thanks to Dan Gillmor.)

Quick diversion into random musing: As I listened to Mick & Cam interview Jeremy Wright (of ensight.org fame) I smiled as they touched on a subject I know all too well - wives and blogging.Based on my personal experience, wives don’t get blogs, can’t understand why you’d read or write one, and when you talk about the subject with her, tend to look at you with a bemused smile that suggests they’re right and you’re wrong.

And the funny thing is my wife even works in the IT industry but admitted she just doesn’t read my blog. No, I’m not upset… really…

That nasty conglomeration of Hollywood media powerbrokers is trying to squash what’s arguably been the most interesting, ground-breaking development in gadgets since the Sony Walkman. Apparently they’re trying to revive the Betamax wars and in doing so take us right back to 1984. It would be funny if it wasn’t so scary.

John Davidson has a piece about it in today’s AFR (behind the firewall here), as does CNet Asia, The Washington Post, and a whole ton of publications via Google News.

And yes, this was a US Tuesday story but yesterday was the Australia Day public holiday, and I’m getting pretty good at ignoring the blogosphere on holidays (gasp! ;).

Just off the phone from talking with ABC 702 breakfast presenter Sally Loan. A colleague of mine came in to my office and told me she was taking calls on the subject of blogs, so I called up without even thinking about it.

And to my surprise, I got on air … and thought ‘oh crap, now what do I say???’. It’s my first time on radio talkback, and I was talking about blogs. Cool.

I commented that I’d blogged both here and in the US. They asked about differences, and I said from a cultural perspective we can be more relaxed/casual etc.

I also disagreed with Sally’s in-studio guest, who didn’t think blogs were taking off in Australia. I argued that I’m reading at least 10 Aussie bloggers of interest to me, and there are hundreds more out there.

And I told her there was an Australian Blogging Conference coming up in Melbourne later this year. Mick, you owe me one mate.

Sally asked me to stay on the line to get more details on the conference, but I got cut off as the news kicked in. Oh well. Sally, if you or your colleagues by some miracle find this blog, check out the conference site here.

UPDATE: I just called the 702 producer and gave them the URL for the blogging conference. Now you really owe me one Mick!

Big news in the blogosphere today. Google, Yahoo and Microsoft are all playing happy families thanks to a Google initiative designed to pull the plug on rewarding ‘evil’ comment spammers.

Splatt’s got some links to Google et al.

Dave’s a happy man, and even has the background story.

An early story from TechNewsWorld.

And just in case you thought everyone was really singing kumbayah, John Battelle is not sold, and sitting on the fence.

My gut take on this yesterday was "We’re making a decision without thinking through the implications." My second gut take was "We can’t possibly imagine all the implications." So my third gut take is "Don’t do it if we can’t imagine what consequences it might have."

For my money, I reckon the effort is worth a shot for a few months. If it turns out we’re completely screwing up the web’s network effect, then switch it off.

The Mark Latham saga isn’t something I’d normally write about, but I’ve been fascinated by the story that’s been keeping the big media busy for weeks now.

Today, Latham announced that he’s finally quitting as the leader of the Federal Labour party, and the member for Werriwa. It’s a decision based on health and family reasons, so on that count I wish him well.

A couple of observations, after reading this report in the SMH.

First, regardless of the rise of blogging, announcements of this sort are never official until you’ve done the hastily arranged Fourth Estate media conference. (Philosophically speaking, if the media were not there, did he really quit? But seriously, where were the political bloggers? Sorry, not invited.

Second, Latham refused to answer questions from reporters. He’s happy for the media to carry the news, but not any form of conversation or context beyond the obvious. Latham’s voters deserve more than this, and history will show that failing to comment simply opens the door for more media speculation. And that speculation will not end until he adds further comment at some point in the future.

Regardless of whether we’re getting news via the Fourth Estate or blogs, it’s clear we expect all the answers. Anything less and we assume the worst.

The latest conversation gripping the blogosphere is revelations in the WSJ that the Howard Dean campaign paid two bloggers in what to me looks like ‘cash for comment’.

I’ve not followed every thread of this discussion, but you can check out a good Slate article here for background. And according to my Blogdex feed, people are all over this post at Blogging Journalism & Credibility. The comments are worth a read.

Picking up on a Trevor Cook post, my reaction to all this is pretty straight forward. No, bloggers are not journalists (that distinction is very clear: Anyone can be a blogger on any subject without being a professional journalist). But the same rules of openess, honesty and accountability still apply. In the same way magazines clearly label advertising and advertorial content for what it is, bloggers must provide the same service for their readers.

And it seems that even in the blogosphere the notion of reading paid-for comment is as equally reviled as it is in traditional media. Amen to that.

Finally, a tip for PR & marketing people: the only reliable method of influencing the blog influencers over the long-term is to speak the same language. Read blogs and start one if you’ve got something to say. If starting one feels too too hard, join the conversation by posting comments on other people’s blogs. The chicanery referenced in the Slate story will always be uncovered.

The lesson for a campaign is obvious: Got a story you can’t convince a mainstream reporter to run? Leak it anonymously to a blog on your payroll. Then get a local reporter to write a story on the controversial, gossipy, local political blog. Soon everyone in town will be talking about the story you leaked to the blog. Voila! Eventually a mainstream news organization will run a story on the rumor that "everyone is talking about." Or they’ll do a "what people are buzzing about on the Internet" piece. And no one will know that the blog post was a paid placement until after the election.

Thanks to Steve Rubel, I’ve fired up a Gmail account. Sure, it’s long overdue, but let’s just say I was waiting for them to iron out all the bugs…

Gmail me: markhjones at gmail dot com

Listening to ABC Radio on the drive to work and I heard that a married couple in Romania named their first baby boy Yahoo in honour of their Internet courtship. I got to work and sure enough, Yahoo News is carrying the story via Reuters.

The ABC DJ mused that the child will probably be so happy about it that he’ll sue his parents once he’s old enough. Tech Dirt wonders if Yahoo Serious might have something to say about it. I’m just glad they dropped the exclamation mark for the boy’s sake. Like Mr Serious, no one would take him seriously…

The Australian reports that Fairfax is in secret negotiations to buy Ten Network, an Australian TV channel. The action comes ahead of proposed changes in cross-media ownership laws. For my money, Ten’s strategic value is the attention it commands from the ‘16-39 year old demographic.’

Fairfax, publisher of The Sydney Morning Herald, The Age and Australian Financial Review, has long held a desire to re-enter the TV market under chief executive Fred Hilmer. The company, which once controlled the Seven Network until it sold in 1987, would be well placed to wrap up Ten if a deal with the Asper family, which controls CanWest, were struck.

While Ten has been unable to threaten the overall dominance of the Nine Network, it is the number one network in the 16-39-year-old demographic with shows such as Australian Idol, Big Brother and The Simpsons. 

This is of course the same demographic that’s knee deep in blogs and other online media. An interesting battle worth keeping an eye on.