Technology Coverage in Irish Newspapers

uvox

Open to opinion on Irish "technology" correspondents in Irish newspapers (Sunday issues included). From what I can see they're largely business reporters with an interest in consumer technology, and avid readers and recyclers of press releases about smart phones, cloud computing and facebook.

Does technology coverage in Irish newspapers have ANY relevance or insight to offer to anyone involved in innovation inor enterprise-level technology efforts in Ireland today? Contrast the lack of insight and proper analysis with sport for example.

shotgun mike

uvox wrote: »

Open to opinion on Irish "technology" correspondents in Irish newspapers (Sunday issues included). From what I can see they're largely business reporters with an interest in consumer technology, and avid readers and recyclers of press releases about smart phones, cloud computing and facebook.

Does technology coverage in Irish newspapers have ANY relevance or insight to offer to anyone involved in innovation inor enterprise-level technology efforts in Ireland today? Contrast the lack of insight and proper analysis with sport for example.

I would hazard that you should think about both the audience intended for technology news in national newspapers and the somewhat small pool or reporters (esp post recession) that papers now use. When the average punter thinks of technology they think of smart phones and broadband.

Obviously if its a choice between a soccer correspondent, and a technology correspondent, papers will choose the former.

IRE60

As they say - you cant be half pregnant! So, if you going to cover tech - cover it properly.

Technology is a integral part of life and the tech coverage in print seems to be rehashed releases about the x-box et. al - it is shocking.

Even some of the Sundays with Tech supplements - muck.

If I see another advertoral on "cloud computing" i'll go native! muck, muck, muck.

flogen

Full disclosure: I write mostly about technology in Irish newspapers & magazines (freelance).

uvox wrote: »

Open to opinion on Irish "technology" correspondents in Irish newspapers (Sunday issues included). From what I can see they're largely business reporters with an interest in consumer technology, and avid readers and recyclers of press releases about smart phones, cloud computing and facebook.

Does technology coverage in Irish newspapers have ANY relevance or insight to offer to anyone involved in innovation inor enterprise-level technology efforts in Ireland today? Contrast the lack of insight and proper analysis with sport for example.

Consumer tech, business tech and innovation/enterprise all get reported in Irish newspapers, albeit to a greater or lesser degree.

Yes, consumer tends to come up trumps and business comes after that but The Irish Times, for example, have an entire monthly supplement dedicated to innovation (it's called Innovation) and have a few articles in the Friday Business section dedicated to the topic every week too.

IRE60 wrote: »

As they say - you cant be half pregnant! So, if you going to cover tech - cover it properly.

Technology is a integral part of life and the tech coverage in print seems to be rehashed releases about the x-box et. al - it is shocking.

Even some of the Sundays with Tech supplements - muck.

If I see another advertoral on "cloud computing" i'll go native! muck, muck, muck.

What would you like to see covered more regularly?

shotgun mike

IRE60 wrote: »

As they say - you cant be half pregnant! So, if you going to cover tech - cover it properly.

Technology is a integral part of life and the tech coverage in print seems to be rehashed releases about the x-box et. al - it is shocking.

Even some of the Sundays with Tech supplements - muck.

If I see another advertoral on "cloud computing" i'll go native! muck, muck, muck.

As mentioned, I would imagine it has a lot to do with Budgets. All Irish papers have been severly affected by the recession and collapse in property advertising, so its not as simple as to just say 'cover it properly'. I'd love if every national paper had a correspondent in every continent to cover changes on the ground, but that's not possible, simply due to financial constraints. What you do have is business journalists double jobbing and covering technology aswell, as most editors unfortunatly, albeit somewhat correctly, lump the two of them together. Look in any business page and you'll see the same journalists covering 2-3 stories a day due to the cutting of staff. you can't just expect these journalists to become all technology-knowing in their spare time. get a grip.

Owen

Honestly, I wouldn't expect the dead tree printing media to give cutting edge technical reviews or advice. The type of people who read a paper to get tech news aren't really going to be the type who refresh engadget/gizmodo/etc 17 times a day.

IRE60

flogen: What would you like to see covered more regularly?

Well to be honest, i wouldn't be the average as (part of the) business in tech based. I confess to have been a regular purchaser of the guardian on a Thursday because of their tech section (which i though was mega).

I think there are so many people involved in tech that surely (dont call me..) we can rise above the x-box games reviews (harsh, but just for emphasis)

shotgun mike: i believe that if someone made the leap of faith and had a dedicated tech corr- it, in this day and age, would be worth the investment.

flogen

IRE60 wrote: »

flogen: What would you like to see covered more regularly?

Well to be honest, i wouldn't be the average as (part of the) business in tech based. I confess to have been a regular purchaser of the guardian on a Thursday because of their tech section (which i though was mega).

I think there are so many people involved in tech that surely (dont call me..) we can rise above the x-box games reviews (harsh, but just for emphasis)

Can you be more specific? What exactly should tech sections be covering that they're not already doing?

shotgun mike: i believe that if someone made the leap of faith and had a dedicated tech corr- it, in this day and age, would be worth the investment.

There are lots of dedicated tech journalists. The Sunday Business Post has Adrian Weckler, The Irish Times has a number; Ciara O'Brien, Karlin Lillington, John Collins all write predominantly on tech (the newspaper seems to have made a concerted effort to cover more tech in the last few years), The Irish Independent has Ronan Price etc. etc.

IRE60

I'd hand it to the IT - out of all the papers they do make a big effort - but from a personal point - i'd like to see a bit more on the business of the net. Tech from a business stand point how it applies, what x means or y. How you can benefit.

ICE HOUSE

Ireland and technology just dont go together in the same sentence.
One word for ya - BROADBAND !!!!

flogen

IRE60 wrote: »

I'd hand it to the IT - out of all the papers they do make a big effort - but from a personal point - i'd like to see a bit more on the business of the net. Tech from a business stand point how it applies, what x means or y. How you can benefit.

I'm genuinely not being awkward but I don't know what you mean by that.

Business of the net as in stories about online businesses? And how businesses can apply tech to what they do etc.? Is that what you mean?

jmcc

uvox wrote: »

Open to opinion on Irish "technology" correspondents in Irish newspapers (Sunday issues included). From what I can see they're largely business reporters with an interest in consumer technology, and avid readers and recyclers of press releases about smart phones, cloud computing and facebook.

To call some of them business journalists is doing them an honour of which they are not worthy. Some are trying hard to reinvent themselves as business journalists when all they really are is lifestyle journalists.

Does technology coverage in Irish newspapers have ANY relevance or insight to offer to anyone involved in innovation inor enterprise-level technology efforts in Ireland today? Contrast the lack of insight and proper analysis with sport for example.

Very little. But you would have to wade through an ocean of crap to find it.

Regards...jmcc

jmcc

flogen wrote: »

Consumer tech, business tech and innovation/enterprise all get reported in Irish newspapers, albeit to a greater or lesser degree.

That is quite an open ended statement.

Yes, consumer tends to come up trumps and business comes after that but The Irish Times, for example, have an entire monthly supplement dedicated to innovation (it's called Innovation) and have a few articles in the Friday Business section dedicated to the topic every week too.

The Irish Times? That bastion of technological cluelessness? That cheerleader of the Dot.Bomb bubble? The same bunch who thought for years that ADSL stood for Asynchronous Digital Subscriber Line?

Historically, I have never had a high opinion of the Irish Times "technology" section. Lately it has become quite formulaic - the token techie column from Danny O'Brien, the product pimping, the odd bit of stuff from the news services, the usual OpEd waffle, some tech business news.

It really needs a bit of reorganisation. John Collins has been concentrating more on the business of technology in recent years and that coverage seems like it is one of the sections strongest assets. However it is let down by the lifestyle waffle masquerading as technology journalism. That really should be in the Saturday supplement. On the upside, the Irish Times technology section is not taken seriously as a "technology" section and is rarely considered as such by those in the technological fields. In that respect the technologically mindless leading the technologically clueless goes largely unnoticed.

What would you like to see covered more regularly?

Less technology? [1] A focus on Irish startups by people that the startups respect? Local technology news rather than press release recycling?

Regards...jmcc
[1] Seems a bit Zen like but you need good techies to explain technology simply. Otherwise you just piss off those who really have a clue and the publication gets a reputation for technological cluelessness. Concentrating on the business of technology might be better - if you have the required good business journalists.

jmcc

flogen wrote: »

There are lots of dedicated tech journalists. The Sunday Business Post has Adrian Weckler, The Irish Times has a number; Ciara O'Brien, Karlin Lillington, John Collins all write predominantly on tech (the newspaper seems to have made a concerted effort to cover more tech in the last few years), The Irish Independent has Ronan Price etc. etc.

But unless I am mistaken about one or more of them, none of them are techies. The Indo also has/had an article feed from Silicon Republic which puts it well ahead of the Irish Times.

Regards...jmcc

jmcc

flogen wrote: »

Business of the net as in stories about online businesses? And how businesses can apply tech to what they do etc.? Is that what you mean?

Selling on the web in a recession - targeting new markets. How to target those markets effectively. How to get paid efficiently. How to go about targeting new markets - what's needed from the website/domain/hosting sides of things. Payment options from Paypal to Realex and which suits your business. What kind of websites are suited to Cloud computing. The differences between VPS/shared/dedicated hosting. There's a load of subjects that could form the basis of a good article.

Regards...jmcc

uvox

Interesting comments. Thank you all. I remain convinced the newspaper buying public is being sold a pup here, with a lot of coverage driven by what's already known and a need to sell advertising. Frankly, these guys are getting a far too easy ride out of it.

jmcc wrote: »

Historically, I have never had a high opinion of the Irish Times "technology" section. Lately it has become quite formulaic - the token techie column from Danny O'Brien, the product pimping, the odd bit of stuff from the news services, the usual OpEd waffle, some tech business news.

I would agree. It's shambolic. Little has moved on since the dreadful, low-level, navel-gazing, observationalist San-Francisco/East Bay/Silicon Valley stuff from Niall O'Brien out there in the last 1990's. This approach periodically resurfaces in the some very lame material from Karlin Lillington about her trips to her Silicon Valley home roots. I care little for her observations about VCs in diners on Sand Hill Road, that the SF Chronicle is now smaller in size (it was always crap anyway), or that there's somebody in the Apple store in Palo Alto who has a job to wipe finger smudges off iPad screens. Insights from moderating forums about dogs for years - who cares - the tech folks at boards.ie would buy and less it 100 times over. Where's the beef?

The last Innovation supplement, for anyone who read it, was weak - Microsoft's Green credentials and cloud computing - again, a standard PR corporate position involving no research, other stuff on government bodies like SFI and so on. Advertising-driven tosh.

The Sunday Business Post is little better on tech front. A rehash of press releases (Damien's done a wow-wee survey on Facebook - who cares - he's selling courses), anything Google alerts or tweetmeme might push their way, and so on. Then there's the Top Gear approach to consumer technology (Adrian doesn't think the iPad will succeeed in business - wrong, offensive SINDO-type stuff about some poor sap in a computer score on minimum wage not knowing about the insides of a PC*) and so on, mushed up with the usual bollocks about cloud computing (more Microsoft and other PR rehash), how broadband is bad in Ireland ("yawn") and online business (here we go again, except the irony of which isn't lost on anyone who ever used the Sunday Business Post "website"). I don't give a rat's ass about Mark Little other than knowing how his business will go about processing the information from sentiment, scalability, aspects of digitical content retrieval and management, and so on. What technology is here? How is is procured? How does it work? Can other businesses use it? Like, those questions' are too hard, dude.

* Do you recognize anyone here?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSINO6MKtco

For anyone serious, by the time Friday or Sunday comes, they're already got what they want from the tubes. For others, they must wait for the same stuff to be rehashed by Irish journalists.

What IS needed is direct, practical relevance to real users, real innovators, real intrepreneurs with real insight - that might be a start. If something's ****e, then say it's ****e. Move discussions of social media beyond marketing and PR. Clearly, there's a need for a David McWilliams-type approach on the Irish tech scene to get the debate rolling. Get yer Pat Phelan's in there. Get rid of the Chris Horns (the Ed Walsh of Irish Innovation), the government task forces, and the others who've made their money and are well past their sell-by dates as touch points for today's innovators.

The real problem with these journos is they're consumer tech users and buyers. They're not developers, innovators, patent filers or anyone with techs or bus experience. They know nothing about enterprise computing. When is the last time you read about the success of ROS (Revenue are the biggest consumers of IT in the state)?

These journos could all easily convert to Sandwich Correspondents covering the likes of O'Brien's or Itsa Bagel without a hitch ("Allen's New O'Brien Sandwich Range Success Due to Lower Cost of Cloud Computing Coleslaw") for all the help they are to anyone. Frankly, why anyone hangs off their every word on Twitter beats me. I don't.

Anyone want to guess next Friday's IT tech coverage? Or tomorrow's SBP efforts? iPhone 4 problems? Foursquare? Twitter and the World Cup?

Sorry girls and boys, but you all need to raise your game above the level of Hot Press. This ain't amateur hour any more.

flogen

jmcc wrote: »

That is quite an open ended statement.

It is! What I meant by it is that some newspapers put a lot of weight into that area but others don't. Impossible to give the Irish media an overall grade on its tech/innovation coverage other than to say it is there.

The Irish Times? That bastion of technological cluelessness? That cheerleader of the Dot.Bomb bubble? The same bunch who thought for years that ADSL stood for Asynchronous Digital Subscriber Line?

So you don't rate Innovation?

Historically, I have never had a high opinion of the Irish Times "technology" section. Lately it has become quite formulaic - the token techie column from Danny O'Brien, the product pimping, the odd bit of stuff from the news services, the usual OpEd waffle, some tech business news.

It really needs a bit of reorganisation. John Collins has been concentrating more on the business of technology in recent years and that coverage seems like it is one of the sections strongest assets. However it is let down by the lifestyle waffle masquerading as technology journalism. That really should be in the Saturday supplement. On the upside, the Irish Times technology section is not taken seriously as a "technology" section and is rarely considered as such by those in the technological fields. In that respect the technologically mindless leading the technologically clueless goes largely unnoticed.

I agree the tech and business tech should be separated - unfortunately it's all lumped in together which doesn't make much sense. In the IT's case Weekend or Magazine - or even the Ticket (which now has games reviews) - might be a better fit for consumer tech.

Less technology? [1] A focus on Irish startups by people that the startups respect? Local technology news rather than press release recycling?

Regards...jmcc
[1] Seems a bit Zen like but you need good techies to explain technology simply. Otherwise you just piss off those who really have a clue and the publication gets a reputation for technological cluelessness. Concentrating on the business of technology might be better - if you have the required good business journalists.

Absolutely - a good tech journalist is one who can explain something complex in a simple way (just as good technology is the sort that can be used by anyone).

As for focusing on local technology companies/stories that's important too but it's a very globalised topic so there needs to be plenty of international coverage too. That doesn't have to be just be product pimping and press release re-hashing.

jmcc wrote: »

But unless I am mistaken about one or more of them, none of them are techies. The Indo also has/had an article feed from Silicon Republic which puts it well ahead of the Irish Times.

What do you mean by 'techies'?

I'm not sure how a newspaper outsourcing copy automatically puts it ahead of another either - that presumes they don't have the talent internally (which you may feel is the case but I don't).

jmcc wrote: »

Selling on the web in a recession - targeting new markets. How to target those markets effectively. How to get paid efficiently. How to go about targeting new markets - what's needed from the website/domain/hosting sides of things. Payment options from Paypal to Realex and which suits your business. What kind of websites are suited to Cloud computing. The differences between VPS/shared/dedicated hosting. There's a load of subjects that could form the basis of a good article.

The problem with that is, if you focus on telling businesses how to use tech better, you run out of ground very quickly. There's absolutely a place for it but it should be a part of general reporting, not the centre-piece.

jmcc

flogen wrote: »

It is! What I meant by it is that some newspapers put a lot of weight into that area but others don't.

Some try and succeed. Some fail drastically.

So you don't rate Innovation?

I'm all for innovation. I just don't think that the Irish Times is particularly innovative.

I agree the tech and business tech should be separated - unfortunately it's all lumped in together which doesn't make much sense.

In most cases it is due to very poor management.

In the IT's case Weekend or Magazine - or even the Ticket (which now has games reviews) - might be a better fit for consumer tech.

That's what I mean by the statement above. The Irish Times is trying to cover all potential audiences and making a mess of things by failing to cover any of them properly.

Absolutely - a good tech journalist is one who can explain something complex in a simple way (just as good technology is the sort that can be used by anyone).

The problem with most of the people who call themselves technology journalists in Ireland is that they have a very poor understanding of technology and it shows. There are some who do have a good understanding but they are rare. There others who realise their limitations and will get good sources for their explanations.

What do you mean by 'techies'?

Some of the people you mentioned are mainly Arts people who accidentally fell into covering technology. They have no strong knowledge of the field upon which to draw. This results in shallow coverage at best and errors at worst. Now they may be able to cover the business of technology but when they try to cover technology, they make mistakes and they irritate those who really do know about technology. And these people who do know about technology are opinion influencers in their businesses.

that presumes they don't have the talent internally (which you may feel is the case but I don't).

They've rotated journos through the section and given them grandiose titles but it seems to be a waypoint rather than a destination for most.

The problem with that is, if you focus on telling businesses how to use tech better, you run out of ground very quickly. There's absolutely a place for it but it should be a part of general reporting, not the centre-piece.

It should be a feature.

Regards...jmcc

jmcc

uvox wrote: »

Where's the beef?

There's no beef. It's all goddamned happy-clappy vegetarian.

What would be really interesting is an article on boards.ie and how it handles running a large scale, high traffic website. Dealing with high traffic/large scale websites is an esoteric field at best but it would give people an insight into what goes on with such a site.

The Sunday Business Post is little better on tech front. A rehash of press releases

The SBP's supplement is an advertising supplement so it cycles through features that are meant to bring in advertising.

Then there's the Top Gear approach to consumer technology (Adrian doesn't think the iPad will succeeed in business - wrong, offensive SINDO-type stuff about some poor sap in a computer score on minimum wage not knowing about the insides of a PC*)

The Top Gear approach only works when there is an indepth knowledge of the technology to make it interesting. Otherwise it is just a mindless rant about the choice of paint colour on the case.

(here we go again, except the irony of which isn't lost on anyone who ever used the Sunday Business Post "website").

There is an upgrade scheduled for the site as the software is getting on a bit.

I don't give a rat's ass about Mark Little other than knowing how his business will go about processing the information from sentiment, scalability, aspects of digitical content retrieval and management, and so on. What technology is here? How is is procured? How does it work? Can other businesses use it? Like, those questions' are too hard, dude.

It was a complete What The F*ck? moment to see Mark Little winning the IIA's Technology Journalist award. But then given the press release recyclers who have won it in the past, it shouldn't have been much of a surprise.

What IS needed is direct, practical relevance to real users, real innovators, real intrepreneurs with real insight - that might be a start. If something's ****e, then say it's ****e. Move discussions of social media beyond marketing and PR. Clearly, there's a need for a David McWilliams-type approach on the Irish tech scene to get the debate rolling. Get yer Pat Phelan's in there. Get rid of the Chris Horns (the Ed Walsh of Irish Innovation), the government task forces, and the others who've made their money and are well past their sell-by dates as touch points for today's innovators.

A David McWilliams approach to the Irish tech scene results in threats of legal action and a lot of upset happy-clappies. Chris Horn seems to be a safe, government approved choice when they need someone to talk about innovation. Talking to innovators would be good.

The real problem with these journos is they're consumer tech users and buyers.

In real terms, they are just clueless civilians.

This ain't amateur hour any more.

In what passes for the Irish, or more precisely, the Dublin technology media scene, it is always amateur hour.

Regards...jmcc

flogen

jmcc wrote: »

The problem with most of the people who call themselves technology journalists in Ireland is that they have a very poor understanding of technology and it shows. There are some who do have a good understanding but they are rare. There others who realise their limitations and will get good sources for their explanations.

Some of the people you mentioned are mainly Arts people who accidentally fell into covering technology. They have no strong knowledge of the field upon which to draw. This results in shallow coverage at best and errors at worst. Now they may be able to cover the business of technology but when they try to cover technology, they make mistakes and they irritate those who really do know about technology. And these people who do know about technology are opinion influencers in their businesses.

I'd imagine if you had more tech journalists with a tech background you'd get another problem - namely an inability to put forward information in an understandable way for Joe Soap.

To be honest I don't think the person's background should make any odds - anyone can become well versed in any area if they wish; it doesn't (or at least shouldn't) matter what they did it college.

I say that as someone who studied Journalism and who is certainly guilty of not always knowing my stuff as well as I should.

It should be a feature.

Regards...jmcc

Agreed.

jmcc

flogen wrote: »

I'd imagine if you had more tech journalists with a tech background you'd get another problem - namely an inability to put forward information in an understandable way for Joe Soap.

That's a very weak argument. Journalism and writing simply are skills that can be acquired. That's the scary thing for a lot of technology journalists - the idea that a techie could actually write coherently about technology in a way that non-technologists could understand.

To be honest I don't think the person's background should make any odds - anyone can become well versed in any area if they wish; it doesn't (or at least shouldn't) matter what they did it college.

So you would be happy to be treated by someone calling themself a 'doctor' who had really just studied sociology in college and had just recently read a Dummies Guide To Medicine? While technology journalism is not quite on the same level, the Dummies Guide reader mentality is quite common in Dublin technology journalism. Becoming "well versed" in technology is not quite the same as reading a book of poetry or eating a sandwich and then writing a review. The mistake non-technologists make about technology is in thinking that it is a single point of study rather than a constellation of specialisations and areas of knowledge.

Technology is about creating and doing. The problem, when it comes to technology journalism, is that most technology journalists have never created anything and never done anything in technology. This is the "Us" and "Them" divide. Technology journalism implies an understanding of technology that is sufficient to write well and and knowledgeably about the subject. Many of these people do not have that understanding and for them to call themselves "technology journalists" is deceitful. Most of them are just cargo-cult lifestyle journalists at worst and some, at best, are business journalists. But technology journalists who genuinely understand technology and have a knowledge deeper than a press release are very rare. Such expertise is a threat to the status quo of the Dublin technology media. To those of us techies who have seen the decay of technology journalism into cargo-cult lifestyle journalism, this encapsulates the situation well:

http://www.horslips.ie/celtic8.html

Regards...jmcc

flogen

jmcc wrote: »

That's a very weak argument. Journalism and writing simply are skills that can be acquired.

As is knowledge in an area - suggesting otherwise is equally weak.

That's the scary thing for a lot of technology journalists - the idea that a techie could actually write coherently about technology in a way that non-technologists could understand.

It's not scary at all, not to me anyway. But why isn't there more of it?

So you would be happy to be treated by someone calling themself a 'doctor' who had really just studied sociology in college and had just recently read a Dummies Guide To Medicine? While technology journalism is not quite on the same level, the Dummies Guide reader mentality is quite common in Dublin technology journalism.

It's not at all on the same level but you're implying you have to have formal tech studies to be a real tech journalist. I don't think that's true; I don't think that's true for any area of coverage.

Can it help? Of course.

Becoming "well versed" in technology is not quite the same as reading a book of poetry or eating a sandwich and then writing a review.

Of course.

Technology is about creating and doing. The problem, when it comes to technology journalism, is that most technology journalists have never created anything and never done anything in technology. This is the "Us" and "Them" divide.

Do you think that's a pre-requisite to being a good technology journalist?

But technology journalists who genuinely understand technology and have a knowledge deeper than a press release are very rare. Such expertise is a threat to the status quo of the Dublin technology media.

You make it sound very planned. Or is there some kind of weekly meeting where the the Dublin technology media discuss this that I should know about?

To those of us techies who have seen the decay of technology journalism into cargo-cult lifestyle journalism, this encapsulates the situation well

Are you still writing technology pieces?

jmcc

flogen wrote: »

As is knowledge in an area - suggesting otherwise is equally weak.

No. The important thing about technology is that much of the knowledge is gained from experience. It is like soldering two bits of wire together. You can read all the books and the articles but in the end it just comes down to doing it.

It's not scary at all, not to me anyway. But why isn't there more of it?

The Dublin technology media scene is like a village pub. Most of the people that populate it are content never to aspire to anything beyond a steady income. They are not worried if it comes from merely recycling press releases or acting as shills for PR companies. Some even end up in PR companies. Few are driven by that need to understand and explain that is shared by all good journalists, scientists and technologists.

It's not at all on the same level but you're implying you have to have formal tech studies to be a real tech journalist. I don't think that's true; I don't think that's true for any area of coverage.

That's the problem. You have people on the technological level of those who believe the astrology sections in newspapers and magazines (the equivalent of press releases in the technology field) trying to explain astronomy. If you don't know the basics of technology then how can you tell when someone is making a claim for their product or service that is not true?

Do you think that's a pre-requisite to being a good technology journalist?

It can certainly help as it can make the difference between an interview and being fobbed off with a press release.

You make it sound very planned. Or is there some kind of weekly meeting where the the Dublin technology media discuss this that I should know about?

There's is even a Technology Journalists Association of Ireland. I am not a member of that organisation so you will probably have to talk to Adrian Weckler or Karlin Lillington about membership.

Are you still writing technology pieces?

Apart from some articles about domain names and web hosting, no. That's what makes the Horslips lyrics so apt.

Regards...jmcc

uvox

The Irish technology journalist fraternity/sorority is piss-poor. A chummy little club of the worst kind. Criticism is frowned upon and not encouraged in case it militates against you not getting a job in RTE or the MSM newspapers.

Actually, we even have Karlin Lillington sitting on the Board of RTE.

http://www.rte.ie/about/authority.html

Please, please, please Karlin/Adrian/Damien/Krisnha/Lisa, please RT my tweets, please, please, I'm soooooooooo needy for validation in the tech space...

jmcc

uvox wrote: »

The Irish technology journalist fraternity/sorority is piss-poor. A chummy little club of the worst kind. Criticism is frowned upon and not encouraged in case it militates against you not getting a job in RTE or the MSM newspapers.

Too bloody true. It is only when you see technology news reporting outside of Dublin, that you really appreciate how Irish technology journalism is driven mainly by incestuous mediocrity.

Actually, we even have Karlin Lillington sitting on the Board of RTE.

http://www.rte.ie/about/authority.html

Another double face-palm reason never to vote Fianna Green.

Please, please, please Karlin/Adrian/Damien/Krisnha/Lisa, please RT my tweets, please, please, I'm soooooooooo needy for validation in the tech space...

Perhaps if you joined the Technology Journalists Association of Ireland they'd retweet you? I wonder if anyone will tweet this thread?

Regards...jmcc

flogen

jmcc wrote: »

No. The important thing about technology is that much of the knowledge is gained from experience. It is like soldering two bits of wire together. You can read all the books and the articles but in the end it just comes down to doing it.

I disagree completely. The idea that you have to do something to be able to write about it is as absurd as it is impractical.

The Dublin technology media scene is like a village pub.

So you're saying the Dublin technology media actively stops technologists from writing about technology in the Irish print media?

Most of the people that populate it are content never to aspire to anything beyond a steady income.

The way things are there are vast swathes of journalists happy to make a living at the moment. Not because they're not ambitious but because ambition doesn't pay the bills.

They are not worried if it comes from merely recycling press releases or acting as shills for PR companies. Some even end up in PR companies.

As do journalists from all areas.

Few are driven by that need to understand and explain that is shared by all good journalists, scientists and technologists.

That's quite an assumption.

That's the problem. You have people on the technological level of those who believe the astrology sections in newspapers and magazines (the equivalent of press releases in the technology field) trying to explain astronomy. If you don't know the basics of technology then how can you tell when someone is making a claim for their product or service that is not true?

And you can't know the basics of technology by doing research?

It can certainly help as it can make the difference between an interview and being fobbed off with a press release.

There are plenty of things that can help a journalist - my question was whether you saw it as a pre-requisite.

There's is even a Technology Journalists Association of Ireland. I am not a member of that organisation so you will probably have to talk to Adrian Weckler or Karlin Lillington about membership.

I'm looking for the Dublin technology media club that makes the decisions about who gets to write technology and who doesn't. I've been to those "meetings" and I can tell you that isn't it.

DublinWriter

uvox wrote: »

Open to opinion on Irish "technology" correspondents in Irish newspapers (Sunday issues included). From what I can see they're largely business reporters with an interest in consumer technology, and avid readers and recyclers of press releases about smart phones, cloud computing and facebook.

Does technology coverage in Irish newspapers have ANY relevance or insight to offer to anyone involved in innovation inor enterprise-level technology efforts in Ireland today? Contrast the lack of insight and proper analysis with sport for example.

No, because they all run scared of p*ssing off their main corporate advertisers.

The most you'll ever get in this country is 'Vista - Why Everyone should use it!' or some vapid advertising feature on how Accenture/SAP/IBM/Bearing Point 'Exceeded Client Expectations' by delivering SAN/ERP/CRM/Whatever-you're-having-yourself for some global client with Irish presence with a horribly staged photo-shoot of a suit from the client with a suit from the provider in front of the client's office-entrance.

jmcc

flogen wrote: »

I disagree completely. The idea that you have to do something to be able to write about it is as absurd as it is impractical.

You may disagree but Technology, by its very nature, is more about doing things than just writing about it. It might be something as trivial as designing a simple static website with a few pages. However knowing what designing a simple website involves would give a technology journalist a slight bit of knowledge when reviewing web design software.

So you're saying the Dublin technology media actively stops technologists from writing about technology in the Irish print media?

It is difficult for technologists to even try to write about technology. And having a technologist write about technology would show up the low level of what passes for knowledge in the Dublin technology media. Technologists writing about technology would be seen as a threat.

And you can't know the basics of technology by doing research?

The Dummies Guide argument?

There are plenty of things that can help a journalist - my question was whether you saw it as a pre-requisite.

Well if someone is going to call themselves a "technology journalist" then it would help if they knew about technology.

I'm looking for the Dublin technology media club that makes the decisions about who gets to write technology and who doesn't. I've been to those "meetings" and I can tell you that isn't it.

The people who make the decisions are the section editors. And they are rarely techies.

Regards...jmcc

mneylon

Compare the quality of the articles in the likes of eWeek, Wired or the Guardian with what gets published in most of the Irish print media

The magazines have a tiny readership, but sell advertising at higher rates than their UK counterparts who have significantly higher readership (though US ad rates are higher than both combined .. )

hmmm

I'm never sure what audience the IT thinks it is targeting in the Technology section of the Friday business supplement. The content seems to fall into one of three standard stories:

1. xyz have raised 20k in funding to develop their software widget, usually accompanied by a photo of people in polo shirts and chinos waving a laptop or something equally "techy"
2. xyz corporate have bought a new CRM system, accompanied by smiling salesman and bemused looking financial controller/head of widget sales
3. A column about something vaguely "gadgety", the latest fad or a human interest story from some US tech giant. More sex and the city than business and finance.

Who is the audience here? The business section of the IT is great and seems to know its audience, the technology section makes very little sense. #1 is interesting to a relatively small group of people, #2 is interesting to no-one except those involved and #3 should be in the Lifestyle section of the main paper.

I think the technology section is missing someone who can write about serious IT issues which affect business while not dumbing down the content. Charlie Fell's column in the business section proper has been a great success, and he is pretty uncompromising in talking about technical financial issues. The reader who wants to know what the iPhone 4 is like has probably already read about it on Engadget or Gizmodo, it doesn't need a less informed Irish slant on it.

uvox

Anyone see the "Here's all the internet browsers (that we think there are in the world)" filler in yesterday's Sunday Business Post? Underwhelmingly typical of that paper. Of course the happy-clappies on Twitter will be delighted. Woot!

Roll on this Friday's Irish Times article about Google in China.

ZZzzzzzzz.

uvox

hmmm wrote: »

I'm never sure what audience the IT thinks it is targeting in the Technology section of the Friday business supplement.

Perhaps we should ask @madam_editor?

Oh hang on, that might be a spoiler for a major part of the Sunday Tribune's ICT coverage wouldn't it (can they make it 5 weeks in a row with drivel about fake accounts)?

jdivision

You really do have a boulder on each shoulder don't you

jmcc

jdivision wrote: »

You really do have a boulder on each shoulder don't you

Then Uvox would be capable of balanced reporting - something of which most of the Irish journalists who call themselves "technology journalists" are quite incapable.

Regards...jmcc

jmcc

hmmm wrote: »

I'm never sure what audience the IT thinks it is targeting in the Technology section of the Friday business supplement.

That is the problem with the Irish Times Technology section. It really hasn't a clue about its audience. But the source of the problem is that it has more of an Arts approach to technology and the business of technology than an industry led approach.

I think the technology section is missing someone who can write about serious IT issues which affect business while not dumbing down the content.

That would be interesting. However that would show up the low technological and business knowledge of others writing for the section so it would be unlikely to happen.

Regards...jmcc

mneylon

Ultimately I think the problem is down to the size of the Irish market.
It's small.
And I mean that in relation to media in general - not just IT / Tech

There is a lot better quality journalism in areas that "pay" eg. current affairs - the latest NAMA / FF / $political scandal will sell papers

monument

jmcc wrote: »

You may disagree but Technology, by its very nature, is more about doing things than just writing about it. It might be something as trivial as designing a simple static website with a few pages. However knowing what designing a simple website involves would give a technology journalist a slight bit of knowledge when reviewing web design software.

I know how to design a simple static website. Can also sometimes tweek other people's more advanced coded to get what I want and mess around with code a bit, to a limited level. I have to agree with you that it probably has given me a better idea of what I'm talking about. It has helped my understanding. But that's limited. Reading about different subjects, talking and questioning people in the know, then talking to others who know the same but may have a different view, can be more important.

Most journalists of any kind will need to be able to understand many things they will never do them self. Sadly the end results can be mixed, but what you seem to be suggesting is not solution to that.

jmcc wrote: »

It is difficult for technologists to even try to write about technology. And having a technologist write about technology would show up the low level of what passes for knowledge in the Dublin technology media. Technologists writing about technology would be seen as a threat.

Technologists by their nature are specialist in one area, tech journalists need to know a lot about many areas of technology.


jmcc - a lot of the problems you're describing sound like problems with journalism generally. There's some great stuff out there on this written for the UK / US but also widely apply to Irish journalism -- the book Flat Earth News deals with general problems while the Bad Science column/blog/book deals with the way science is reported. Some depressing stuff for anybody with an interest in journalism.

jmcc

monument wrote: »

I know how to design a simple static website. Can also sometimes tweek other people's more advanced coded to get what I want and mess around with code a bit, to a limited level. I have to agree with you that it probably has given me a better idea of what I'm talking about. It has helped my understanding. But that's limited. Reading about different subjects, talking and questioning people in the know, then talking to others who know the same but may have a different view, can be more important.

It also has another less visible benefit - credibility with a source. A techie talking to a journo who understands what they are talking about it more likely to provide a better interview or explanation when asked. The typical attitude in the industry to some Irish technology journalists is purely an "Us" and "Them" one. Good tech journalists are part of the industry and the industry identifies with them because they can be trusted to report matters accurately. The industry trusts them because they know they aren't talking to a technological idiot that has to have their press releases printed on drool proof paper.

Technologists by their nature are specialist in one area, tech journalists need to know a lot about many areas of technology.

That's a dangerous fallacy. Technologists become specialists by knowing many areas and choosing to specialise in one of them.

a lot of the problems you're describing sound like problems with journalism generally. There's some great stuff out there on this written for the UK / US but also widely apply to Irish journalism -- the book Flat Earth News deals with general problems while the Bad Science column/blog/book deals with the way science is reported. Some depressing stuff for anybody with an interest in journalism.

True. There was an article in Byte magazine in the early 1990s that effectively charted the demise of tech journalism as it related to computing. Byte died for many when the Jerry Pournelle element (happy-clappy product review and lifestyle stuff) took over from the Steve Ciarcia element (read by techies). Gradually the clue factor collapsed and the magazine was sold to a company that produced a consumer Windows magazine.

It seems that the same patterns repeat in most forms of journalism. Journalistic expertise was built up over years but now that whole process of development has been replaced by production-line journalism courses. It takes a while to build up a specialisation in any area but a lot of the people who write about technology just use it as an entry level position so that they can get on to other subject areas.

Regards...jmcc

jdivision

jmcc wrote: »

Then Uvox would be capable of balanced reporting -

Or would collapse under the weight of his own bias

jmcc wrote: »

It takes a while to build up a specialisation in any area but a lot of the people who write about technology just use it as an entry level position so that they can get on to other subject areas.

Completely agree with that. Adrian Weckler imo is the best in Ireland by a mile and part of that is because he's both interested in it and been writing about it for a long time.

jmcc

jdivision wrote: »

Completely agree with that. Adrian Weckler imo is the best in Ireland by a mile and part of that is because he's both interested in it and been writing about it for a long time.

Adrian is fine as the editor of an advertising supplement aimed at a business audience but I wouldn't consider him to have a good, in-depth knowledge of technology. There are technology journalists who have been writing about the field longer than him. Some of them are just Lifestyle journalists but others actually have more of a knowledge of the field. Gordon Smith seems to have been around for a while. John Collins has more recently concentrated on the business of technology. David D'Arcy (former editor of Computerscope) was one of the best editors/tech journos but went into PR. Marie Boran and John Kennedy of Siliconrepublic are also relatively good. Between the all Irish technology journalists, Ireland probably has the makings of one good technology news publication.

Regards...jmcc

uvox

jdivision wrote: »

You really do have a boulder on each shoulder don't you

Given the context, I can at least thank you for avoiding "chip".

uvox

Incidentally, what's the story with the NUJ - are they receiving a discount on Apple gear here like they were in the UK (15%), hence more bias claims there (though not all are in the NUJ).

jmcc

uvox wrote: »

Incidentally, what's the story with the NUJ - are they receiving a discount on Apple gear here like they were in the UK (15%), hence more bias claims there (though not all are in the NUJ).

Fascinating. It would explain some of the glowing coverage when most people are using IBM compatibles. Just took a glance at the latest Irish Times "technology" section - mostly the same week in week out self centered puke and press releases. As for Danny O'Brien's TIRED piece: Who gives a f*ck? Microsoft got a patent for its anti-cybersquatting software this week and guess what domain name was immediately cybersquatted. The Irish Times really needs to reorganise that section and get some new blood in there quickly.

Regards...jmcc

uvox

Since you tempted me, I flicked through it in the newsagents: Drivel about childhood memories of Star Trek and how they might pan out. Irrelevant piece done to death already on iPhone v Android O/S feature functionality comparison (though that is not the way it is marketed on the front page), missing completely what relevance this is to Irish people or businesses in terms of what, when and how they're available and how they might be used as opposed to descibed. As for Microsoft coverage, sure what company hasn't had internal politics that screwed up priorities or projects?

And of course, we have the perfunctory ad / PR placement for the latest happy clappy webbie docklands worshipfest for the Magnolia-Cruise manque. Except the event is already closed for registration.

All to be repeated this Sunday.*

Now, I read something about a "Motorola Droid" and the iPhone 4 (see above), so excuse me as I rush down to the shops to buy both before they sell out by noon.

* Along with bit about Old Spice guy and iPhone 4 bumpers (maybe France.fr).

Brussels Sprout

*Grunch*

The Guardian Columnist Ben Goldacre wrote about this extensively in his excellent book 'Bad Science'. He made the point that newspapers are only really interested in sensational headlines when it comes to science.

His book particularly focused on health stories in the media. A lot of these stories are not based on credible peer reviewed studies. Worryingly enough a lot of them are simply made up.
A common practice is for the newspaper to come up with a story based on questionable science and then rent an 'expert' to add a bit of credibility to the story. As a result there are a legion of 'specialists who certain reporters simply ring up for a quote or two to make their story more scientific.
He used an example of one of the british tabloids running a story about how women's arses reflect their personality type or something nonesensical like that (with gratuitous pictures of celebrities rear ends as examples).

Most scientific correspondences are journalists with a passing interest in science. If they are handed a study they generally do not check it's references or indeed even the details. Usually it'll be a quick skim of the abstract which of course can lead to things being taken completely out of context or vital clauses or stipulations being omitted.

uvox

I take your point. Newspapers are a business. Applying academic standards such as peer review wouldn't apply here, however the equivalence of reproing abstracts without analysis is analogous to the filler and soft focus PR puffery and navel gazing we see dominating pages.

Peer review for such journos would take the form of: "@scobelizer PLEEEEEEZE RT ME, MR. SCOBELIZER, PLEEEEZE, PLEEEZE, PLEEEZE. WOOT!"

This failure is nothing new. The powerhouses of the dot com explosion more than 10 years ago were SUN, Oracle, EMC, Cisco, yet (other than their stock prices) the focus was on the front end baubles.

The biggest spenders on ICT in the State are probably the Revenue. Yet, when was the last time you saw coverage of what they've done with ROS and the backend stuff? It knocks the bollocks off anything in the US or Europe.

Even within the ICT industry itself (however you define it) there is a problem with professional analysts. Analysts do not tell you about the applicability of technology to future, they tell you about the recent past. A few could ones will tell you about today. Maybe that's what we need in media coverage too - a few copped on people who've actually worked in the industry and understand the concept of applied technology. The ones we have now appear to struggle even with the basic concept of the difference between innovation versus entrepreneurship. They're all based around consumer and personal technology and buzz words such as "cloud computing", "green creditionals", "social media" and the rest, mixed up with visceral, emotional reaction. Sure you got to sell ads and attract readership. And there's a place for that, but that's all we have now.

Today's Irish Times coverage is a classic example.

I enjoy Paul Taylor in the FT. You know what you're getting when you read him. No BS. Just "I tested this bit of personal technology and I compared it with that bit. I hven't a clue what JavaScript or The Cloud is, but I like this bit because I think it works in these scenarios for you." Irish tech journos come across like the contrived Tyler Brule by comparison.

uvox

Today's effort from Karlin Lillington.

Time is right to bring back third-level fees and grants


http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2010/0730/1224275802120.html

The woman has no class.

shotgun mike

uvox wrote: »

Today's effort from Karlin Lillington.

Time is right to bring back third-level fees and grants


http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2010/0730/1224275802120.html

The woman has no class.

What has this got to do with technology? and how has she no class?

Also, it has been recognised by many that free third level education did not really help those in lower economic classes, merely those in middle-upper class. The intention of abolishing the fees was to bring more children from lower-income families into third level education, and a lot of data suggests this did not occur.

jmcc

uvox wrote: »

Today's effort from Karlin Lillington.

Time is right to bring back third-level fees and grants


http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2010/0730/1224275802120.html

Perhaps the section editor(s) thought that it was a deep and well considered analysis of Irish technology and science education. I've given up trying to figure out the mental processes of those in the Irish Times technology section. The best thing they could do would be to get rid of the deadwood twaddle merchants and give some new journalists a chance.

Regards...jmcc

uvox

I agree. Utterly piss-poor filler. I mean if RTE came up with this in a technology slot, er....

http://www.rte.ie/about/authority.html

uvox

Microsoft PR:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2010/0806/1224276306462.html