DISQUS

Oh dear. Blush. Withdrawn.

Indeed it is. That should be fixed now.

James is referring to this story.

@Ryan - Couldn't agree more. The text editor in DW is brilliant - it's the only bit I use. But ever since I discovered that Taco HTML Edit does more or less the same thing, I don't think I've opened DW once.

Mark's post on this issue hits the nail on the head.

Teaching software instead of underlying principles is like teaching a monkey to press a red button when he is hungry. Move the monkey to cage where the banana machine uses a blue button, and the monkey goes hungry...

Andy,

I think their is a danger that dreamweaver can be a bit of straw man in the debate. A bit of a totem to represent web 1 when we are all supposed to be web 3.

True. Both my experience and the example that Amy Gahran used in the post that started this were of courses where Dreamweaver was more or less the only thing taught about online journalism.

Gary,

Sorry I don't really know how you would go about calculating that. Presumably the percentage of subsidy would vary widely depending on the farmer.

The most comprehensive source of the EU data is Farmsubsidy.org.

Its US equivalent is the Farm Subsidy Database compiled by the Environmental Working Group.

Lucas is quite right: This column actually misses the point somewhat. Penelope Trunk was not let go because she was not generating enough traffic - it's much worse than that.

According to her own account, the type of content she provided was apparently generating plenty of traffic, but was driving down the total CPM of Yahoo Fiinance.

Ian, no -- I need to increase my mailbox size to deal with the level of spam I get!

James,

I haven't actually lived in the US for a decade - and it's about that length of time since I've seen what I'd consider serious amounts of snow.

The video is great. I just found the headline amusing.

Due to a persistent spam problem on this post, comments have been closed.

If you have something to say about this post, please feel free to e-mail me. The address is near the top of this page.

Used MySpace? Certainly not. Don't be silly.

Murdoch certainly has some Facebook envy.

Simon,

Done. Very, very sorry. I've been half asleep all week. Maybe blogs do need subeditors. Mine sure does.

Shorter version of the above: 1-nil is a common final score in baseball. It is extremely exceptional in cricket.

I've never had a comment on such an old post. Interesting points.

However, I think you misunderstand how outs work in baseball. You can only end the game on outs, not on number of batters like in cricket. Getting any particular individual batter out doesn't matter -- the batting team gets three outs to score in each inning, regardless of how many batters hit to reach that point. The game ends after 9 lots of 3 outs for each time, regardless of how many batters it takes.

Because runs can only be scored within those 3-out spells, failing to obtain an out at a particular moment in a baseball game is (usually) more important than obtaining an out at a particular moment in a cricket match.

Of course, there are exceptional moments in both games where these situations are reversed. In bsaeball, there are situations where a fielding team might concede a base to a batter (in order to set up force plays later on, or to avoid a dangerous batter in the order), and in very close cricket matches, the result can turn on halting a particular batsman at a particular moment. But in both games, those are the exceptions, not the rule.

Yeah, turns out I got that one pretty wrong, huh. Who would have thought a Private Members Bill would have got so far.

Mark,

I am in complete agreement with your comment. It was an honest, (if unacceptable) mistake, but it was dealt with brilliantly.

I seriously hope I haven't put anyone off blogging, and that the university doesn't restrict its students' blogging as a result.

I notice that the blogger who irked me initially has now amended that post. Thanks.

Yes, I thought I heard the sound of barrels being scraped, too. But both the New York Times and the Daily Telegraph had it on their front pages.

Ian,

Have you actually read my post?

I made it clear in my clarification that I do not wish to suggest that everyone at UCLAN is responsible for this, even though the original tone of the post might have suggested that. I was always careful to stress that I am complaining about some specific students. I also mentioned one UCLAN student blogger whose work I really like. There are many other great student-journalists who blog.

However, as discussed in the post, this is not an isolated incident. There have been other cases of journalism students displaying poor blogging and professional practice at other universities. Another working journalist expressed similar experiences. There is clearly a broader issue to be discussed here.

I must stress, as I have elsewhere, that I do not think this was a case of deliberate plagiarism. As Robin Hamman notes above, far more more serious cases have occurred at blogs run by paid professionals.

Second, contrary to your assertion, the author of the post in question has not been in touch with me to apologise. The post by Monkey is not the one to which I was referring.

Third, as I explained in the post, I would have responded less publicly if that option had been available. The whole point of this post (and indeed your and university lectuers' criticism of it) is that bloggers should be personally responsible for their actions. The university has done nothing wrong, and as I explained in my clarification, is actually to be commended for providing you with an excellent learning experience. Why should I involve them?

I am astonished by your call for a "less public" solution. The whole point of the way blogging is changing journalism is that journalists need to understand that their readers, using blogs, will hold them to account in a much more public manner than was previously possible. If you are going to blog publically, you need to be ready to accept public criticism.

As it happens, I e-mailed my post to a lecturer at the university immediatly after posting it in order to give an opportunity to reply.

Jonathan Freedland and Charlie Beckett would have made very good choices as well.

Both reject the code in practice, but seem to support the idea that it may be necessary.

Ironically given its subject matter, Freedland's CiF post on this was actually the model of a sensible blog debate, as Kevin Anderson points out.

My Press Gazette colleague Patrick Smith has just made a very important point: This has only happened because UCLAN is sticking its neck out by teaching blogging as part of its journalism curriculum.

There is no textbook that will teach students any of this, and people like Andy Dickinson are to be commended for being on the cutting edge of journalism education.

UCLAN should be commended for its vision in this area, and I hope nobody suggests that the additional risks such innovation brings with it should be a reason to be more conservative with student blogs.

Andy,

Sorry about causing you some dread, that wasn't my intention.

I'd rather not name the student, though. I don't want to cause any embarrassment or other problems for anyone.

I also rather you didn't take anything down, because the post actually makes some useful points and shows that the student in question is thinking about the implications of the issue raised in the article for their future career.