I’m back. In about an hour, I’m going to be conducting an interview with Paul Pennelli of College Publisher about their new video service. Expect that story to be posted later today (along with an audio of the phone interview if all goes according to plan). #

In the meantime, here are a few of the recent posts from others in the media blogosphere that you might want to read: #

Mark Hamilton: That genie’s flown part 1 and part 2, in which Mark dissects the argument about the value of newspaper content. One of the most intriguing thoughts: #

One more piece of this, perhaps minor, is how copyright works. Because copyright deals with the expression of an idea, and not the idea itself, newspapers are in a very different positions than, for instance, the entertainment industry. Copyright applies to everything in a newspaper from the front page to the back, but only the actual written form. Any (unethical, immoral) body can take the content of a newspaper, substantially rewrite and re-present the factual information, and publish it without fear of lawsuit. A record company may own a song — from lyrics right through the actual cut — but newspapers only control the particular way the words are strung together. #

 John Robinson: Newspaper Music. Robinson catches one of the themes of the newspaper industry change that’s taking place: We’re not in the paper business. We’re in the information business. #

One result of today’s news world is that editors are realizing that the piano builders may not be giving the pianists what they want. Who understands a newspaper better — the journalist who works for one or the person who reads it? My answer is different today than it would have been two years ago. We’re not in the piano-making business; we’re in the music business. #

 Alfred Hermida: The differences between video on the TV and video on the Net.  A lesson for college media here: it’s not that they come to your site, but that they see your content (see above from John Robinson). #

Broadcasters can no longer rely on people coming to their TV channel or website. Instead they should focus on making their content as accessible as possible. What matters is that people watch your video. Whether they watch it on CBS.com, YouTube or a blog is irrelevant. #

Angela Grant: Right place, right time. Grant changes her view on giving cameras to reporters, because of the ability of a reporter to be where the action is at any moment. #

Howard Owens: Let your community be your ombudsman. We recently had a spate of discussion on a listserv about reader comments and reporters responding to comments. Owens makes some good suggestions for how to handle reader comments: #

Here’s my solution: Start a “criticism blog.” Put all those questioning and critical letters in the blog, and like a blog quote and respond. Fisk the letters if necessary. Open up comments on each post. Encourage a dialogue about the issues raised by the letters. #

The “we don’t respond to critics” attitude seems like an extension of the packaged goods media paradigm of “here’s the news, take it or leave it.” I’m not sure that’s how we win in the digital age. #

 Mindy McAdams: Which video camera for your newspaper? Mindy’s a constant read, and you should read her blog yourself. Lots of good tutorials and thinking about multimedia. I tend to think college news orgs should invest in a couple of different types of video cameras, if they have the budget to do so: at least one higher-quality “prosumer” camera for your visual journalists to use, and some relatively low-cost cameras for reporters to carry with them for shorter, “add-on” video and audio features. #

That should be enough to keep you busy for now #

#