Thursday 15 January 2009

Capturing Cardiff

When we think of politicians, we tend to think of crusty old men, with beards like rhododendrons, sitting uncomfortably in designer suits. The advent of New Labour in 1995 saw politicians try to become slick city types, but still they couldn’t overcome this age old perception, and with the prominent MPs of the time being people like Tony Benn, Michael Howard and John Major I’m not surprised.

But the National Assembly for Wales in Cardiff Bay has been the scene of a quiet revolution. The young legislature hosts a membership that is challenging the traditional perception of politicians; 20% of Assembly Members are under the age of forty. That figure itself isn’t that remarkable, nor is it that different compared to Westminster, but the impact that these young AM’s have had is far more significant.

In December Kirsty Williams was elected as leader of the Welsh Liberal Democrats, at the ripe old age of 37. Carwyn Jones, the man widely tipped to take over as First Minister this year, is 41. There is speculation of a leadership coup within the Welsh Conservatives led by Darren Millar and Jonathan Morgan, 32 and 34 respectively. Two of Plaid Cymru’s most prominent AM’s Bethan Jenkins and Nerys Evans are 27 and 28 years old.

This has made me wonder whether the prominence of young AMs in Wales has changed attitudes. Do people in Wales see politics as a career rather than a vocation?

The danger with younger people in elected office is the perception that they are simply there to climb the ladder of power as fast as they can. Fresh out of University they will work for a political party, live and breathe local politics and before they know it, they will be standing for elected office.

But Dominic Hannigan says that isn’t necessarily the case. A 25 year-old Liberal Democrat party worker, Dominic stood in the 2005 Assembly election for the Cardiff South and Penarth constituency; he is now a Liberal Democrat prospective parliamentary candidate.

He believes that having less ‘life experience’ doesn’t mean that young people can’t be effective politicians, besides what constitutes life experience anyway? Dominic believes that being a good politician is all about the person, their ideals, beliefs and personal skills.

But why are there so many down the bay? Is there something in the water here that makes us all want to become politicians? The Cardiff political scene is a youthful one, with a lot of young activists, councillors and political support staff; it seems that this community is attracting other young people down to the Senedd. The electoral system here in Wales is also having an impact, because it works on a system of proportional representation; this means that some AMs are not elected directly but chosen from a central list. Parties use these lists to try and boost diversity in the chamber, and so most of the younger members are elected thanks to the list system.





Younger politicians are a good way of attracting a largely apathetic public into politics. As much as I dislike using Barack Obama as an example, he has shown how engaging with the young vote increases turnout. And as these whipper snappers continue to rise to prominence the hope is that they can emulate his success.

Dominic Hannigan thinks that the Welsh Assembly is doing quite a good job of being youthful, but feels that more can be done, and by looking at the positions of power, we see that he may have a point. The Assembly Cabinet, which holds most of the decision making power of the institution, is full of your archetypal stiff politicians.

Having spent hours in and around the Assembly I can’t help noticing the hordes of young support workers milling around. I also can’t help feeling that they all harbour hopes of one day becoming an elected official. But does this really matter? As long as our politicians are there because they want to make a difference to society, surely it can’t matter if they're 17 or 87? And yes there will be the odd one with no social skills but a first in political science; equally there will be someone with a wealth of life experience who can’t construct a coherent sentence.


The quiet revolution is set to continue... what impact it will have is still unclear.


Steffan


Here's my interview with Dominic Hannigan:




Here's a Google Map of the under 40 AMs




View Larger Map


Hwyl Fawr

Saturday 3 January 2009

The Digital Revolution - What I've Learned So Far



Unless you’ve been watching repeats of “Only Fools and Horses” for the past ten years and haven’t ventured outside or read any newspapers then you’ll be aware of the change that has happened. The 19th Century saw the Industrial revolution, the 1960s brought us the sexual revolution and now we have the digital revolution.

I have had mixed feelings about this so called revolution, as I have discussed in previous posts. The impact it is having on my chosen profession is significant, and therefore the impact it is having on me is significant. To deal with this I have tried to befriend this new technology, with varied success.

There are aspects of the digital revolution that I think are simply brilliant. The fact that anyone with a laptop and some photos can make a little narrative about anything they want, and publish it to the World, is in my opinion genius. Digital storytelling shows that it’s not just Hollywood that can make you laugh, smile or cry. I had loads of fun coming up with my effort. .

Blogging, despite the views of people like Steve Lovelady who thinks bloggers are “salivating morons”, does offer people the chance of insightful conversation with people from all over the World. My experience with blogs has made me believe that they are brilliant tools for people to talk about specific issues, niche subjects and raise awareness. But never should they take over the traditional media. There is strong evidence that shows the digital revolution has left some behind, and we must always remember them.

For all the good the digital revolution has done, it has also done some things that it should be made to go and sit in the corner for. With so much content being posted online all day every day, finding quality journalism has become a more difficult. This concern has been around for some time, and has only intensified of late.

Another problem with the digital revolution is that of churnalism. Larry Kramer once said after ‘Google News’ was short listed for an award, “that’s like nominating the Yellow Pages for a National Magazines Award”. To be fair to the digital revolution this isn’t only an internet specific problem.

Whether you think it’s a good or bad a thing, like those before it, the digital revolution is here stay. My movements will be forever known to every man woman and child in my network thanks to Twitter and Facebook and I have come to accept this as a positive thing. I can instantly contact anyone who I’ve ever said hello to if I want, and journalistically that’s a really useful tool to have in your back pocket. I can read Mr Jones from Tycroes’ opinion on income tax, or watch a story about a man’s dog that brings a tear to my eye.


The digital revolution has opened up the World to everyone, and if you have the patience to trawl through the rubbish there are scores of gems to find.

Hwyl fawr

Steffan

Image used courtesy of ninakulhawy @ Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/ninakulhawy/2356930878/

Tuesday 18 November 2008

A Bloggers Lament




A question occurred to me as I spent my spare time musing about life, the universe and everything. If a good blog is one that is both informative and frequent, how do you marry the informative part with the frequent part? Surely the more often you write the less informative the material? Unless of course your blogging about something which a) you care about b) is constantly changing or updating c) covers everything.

I have enjoyed my initial foray into blogging, but for me (and my *cough* readers) to get the most out of my efforts I think I need to feel impassioned about the subject, and whilst I enjoy learning about online media and understand it’s relevance to me and my chosen career, it doesn’t get my creative juices going as it were.

So perhaps if I were to blog on an issue that is closer to my heart the whole frequency, interesting/informative thing, might be less of a problem?

But with the apparent death of blogging thanks to new forms of micro-blogs is there much point in me persisting?

I think there is, not because I believe that blogs will ever take over or properly compete in the news market, but because they can offer a great means of comment and analysis as displayed by my two favourite bloggers, Betsan Powys and Nick Robinson.

Just a quick note before I have to leave, I must confess to being a fully fledged Twitter convert. For spreading news fast and creating a good contacts base I think it’s really affective, if a little addictive. It also helps that one of my personal heroes Stephen Fry is probably the most active Twitterer in the World, except for this girl maybe.





Nos da

Steffan

Image used courtesy of Heilemann from Flickr @ http://www.flickr.com/photos/heilemann/106720119/

Thursday 23 October 2008

Is digital networked journalism a help or a hindrance?




For the most part I like to think that I have taken a positive approach to new forms of journalism. I have tried my best to embrace new technologies and new means of communication. I make this sound like an arduous task but in truth it hasn’t been, signing up to various new websites takes minutes and getting to grips with them doesn’t take that much longer, and the benefits are plain to see, or are they?

Contacts have, and probably always will, be a vitally important part of journalism, and through sites like Mento and Twitter we can simply and quickly create vast networks with people all over the world, who we can consequently contact quickly and simply, and perhaps more importantly cheaply.

In theory I am all for Twitter and Mento et al, my problem (which is perhaps due to my rookie status as a twitterer) is that my Twitter or Mento inbox rarely give me anything of use to work with. I am either inundated with updates from the BBC or the Guardian every 2 minutes or told something uninteresting by those I’m networked with (no offence guys, I am equally uninteresting). The sheer amount of updates from big media organisations means that quite simply, I now ignore them, because they all blend into one, and why is it my concern if Cemlyn now has a BT landline?

But ever the optimist I will continue to plug away because I accept that someday, as we all learn how to Mento and Twitter effectively, my network will begin to provide me with jems of knowledge that I would otherwise be ignorant of, that’s my hope anyway. My one shining light so far has been the discovery of my new favourite website, Wordle, try it it’s amazing.

On a related but slightly different note, Wales has just hosted its first blogging debate. Attended by eminent Welsh bloggers, Assembly members and the like the merits of blogging were discussed in an open forum. According to Betsan Powys, an influential Welsh Blogger (and BBC Wales political correspondent), the event was a success. As well as having good sandwiches the discussion turned some nay sayers into budding bloggers. I think this shows that were not all that backwards here in Wales!

Hwyl am y tro,

Steffan
Image used courtesy of Jeff Cheng @ http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffcheng/2368021384/

Thursday 16 October 2008

Citizen Journalism: Is this really democracy?






Public journalism, amateur journalism, citizen journalism, user generated content, call it what you want, the fact remains that journalism isn’t the sole preserve of journalists. It is in fact within anyone’s power to contribute to the wider public debate, and now with a bewildering array of tools available it has never been easier for Joe Bloggs to express his opinion to the World.

It is argued that citizen journalism is good for democracy, that by enabling the world and his wife to tell their story we are protecting article 10 and the freedom of expression. Citizen journalism is a means of taking power away from dominant media organisations and giving it to us, the men and women on the Clapham omnibus.

Through this democratisation of media outlets news reporting and production will come more of an integrated seminar, a round table discussion rather than the lectures that big news corporations have been providing. No longer will we be talked at, instead we will be talked to.

This, in my opinion, is all well and good in theory, however I do feel that in practice the phenomenon of UGC is not as relevant as the theorists would like to think. Ofcom's recent report suggests that the take up of broadband and digital media has slowed recently and in certain working class areas access is limited at best. This would imply that the new media, which provides potential for an explosion of citizen journalism, is not being used by every strand of society. If therefore citizen journalism is the domain of the middle class and above is it the enabling factor that some perceive it to be?

I also feel that those who regularly spread their word over the “inter-web” tend to be those who harbour extreme views, those who hold a grudge against someone or something, or those with time on their hands.

Whilst I also accept that video footage taken by ‘passers by’ is now being frequently used by news bulletins, the best footage of an incident or an event comes in my opinion from a talented or experienced cameraman. Take for example the footage of 9/11, I believe that the most poignant pictures were not those taken by a passing camera phone but those taken by professionals who happened to be at the scene at the time (like the falling man for instance).

The moral of the story from my perspective is that whilst UGC holds the potential to be democratically enabling by letting us take a more active role in our news consumption, at this early stage it is merely the arena for issue campaigners, nutters and those who can.

Heres a nice video I found that gives a good overview of citizen journalism, it may help you make up your own mind. I for one however feel that only when every demographic gets in on the action can we truly call UGC a force for democracy.



Hwyl fawr

Steffan

Image used Courtesy of Vaxzine @ http://www.flickr.com/photos/vaxzine/450074599

Thursday 9 October 2008

Web 2.0 it’s the future, I’ve tasted it.





Web 2.0 is happening now, and its here to stay. I have probably been aware of this fact for quite some time but I never got round to giving it any serious consideration until recently. Whilst many of my peers remain sceptical about the application of new technologies and remain unsure about their relevance and their future, I found myself agreeing with the comments made by Huw, who rightly in my opinion, explains that if any proof was needed to show that web 2.0 is here to stay we need to look no further than certain establishments along the San Fernando Valley.


What the web has achieved is to fundamentally change the way we consume news. It would appear that laziness has spread from the school playground, and the masses of obese children that now reside there, into our homes. No longer must we actively “surf” the web to find our news, thanks to web 2.0 it comes to us.

So what does this new breed of technology actually change? It strikes me that web 2.0 empowers us as consumers. No longer are we tied down to purchasing our daily intake of news from corner shops, supermarkets or newsstands. No longer must we hang around for the 6 o’clock news jingle to find out what’s happening in the world. With web 2.0 creating interactive news available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week we can now control exactly what we consume when we want to consume it. It is apparent to me that this means powerful media organisations are now chasing after us, rather than the other way around. Having the latest video clip or poll tracker on a website can now make the difference in the amount of hits it receives, and therefore how much advertising money the powerful media organisation makes. Enticing us, the active consumer, has never been so important.

However despite this break-up of the “traditional media”and the increasing importance of services like Twitter, Flickr, Wikis, Mento and Facebook, I still believe that there is a place for Huw Edwards and John Humphrys. I still believe that people in society enjoy having a certain comfort blanket, knowing that periodically the same faces are telling them what’s happening. Audience members have built up a relationship with these faces over the years and trust their judgement, and therefore despite being able to go and get their news whenever they want, they would prefer to wait and see what Huw has to say. With BBC News retaining solid viewing figures of around 5 million, we can see that for some, the old ways are the best.

I have embraced the future as best as I can, I am the proud owner of an igoogle page with my personalised news full of RSS feeds, I Twitter and I bookmark my favourite sites for all to see. I appreciate the importance of having good networks to be able to learn more, share things and tell stories in every possible way. But at my core I’m a bit of a traditionalist.


What the future holds is a mystery but I can foresee more of the same, more interactivity, more fancy applications, and more personalised news. I can also foresee new household names, the next Natasha Kaplinsky and more from Huw and John. Ultimately I feel that despite the emergence of these new and exciting technologies we humans are creatures of comfort, and there’s something comforting about meeting and old face, that we know and love, and listening to what they’ve got to say.

Hwyl Fawr


Steffan

Image Courtesy of Tobias Eigen @ http://www.flickr.com/photos/tobiaseigen/434264025/