social-platforms

Tweeting with the enemy

Fri, 19 Feb 2010 04:31:30 +0100

Earlier this week I had to take time to think before I responded to two different Tweets to me. One of which I discussed with a manager before answering. I know I did right in my answers, but I still feel, well, dirty about it.

My mantra in using social media has always been: Be Smart. Social networks are tools you decide how to use; you don’t let them use you. This includes doing all you can to know with whom you’re interacting and why.

First I responded to a Tweet from a journalist at a competing media outlet. If you didn’t read this person's bio you might not know what his job is, but I read every bio of every person I respond to and read the bios before I follow anyone. So I knew who I was talking to and why he’d asked me the question.

Sometimes it’s okay to play nice with the competitor. I admit though it went against my natural instinct. This person asked me if information he had was the same as the information I had. I thought about two things before answering honestly and saying yes the information was the same:

First, I thought about how long the photographer we had at the scene had been there and if we’d lose anything by saying we had the same information. The answer was no, we wouldn’t lose anything. The photographer had been on scene for a while getting good video and the Public Information Officer was there talking to media.

Second*, the journalist didn't ask me to give him information he didn't have. He asked me to verify I had same information as he did. I would never give a competing journalist exclusive information,** but I felt in this case I was fine confirming the information.

The second Tweet asked me a question about changes in the station’s news programming. Normally, I answer all programming questions without thinking about it. This time however the Tweet came from person who has chosen to keep his/her identity secret and writes a blog discussing and analyzing the local television newscasts.

I’ve Tweeted back and forth with this person before, but I am always aware of what I’m saying and I know at any moment my Tweet could be used as a quote, or used as a source. (Now, the same can be said for all my Tweets, all my facebook posts, all my social networking interactions. I’m always aware of this.) To not know who this person is and what, if any, motivation there is in the question, is what bothered me.

I decided before I responded to the Tweet that I should discuss it with a manager. I never doubted I wouldn’t give an answer, but I wanted to make sure my wording was acceptable. It was, so I responded. Now I’ll watch to see how, if at all, my answer will be used by this person.

I feel I was right in my decisions and answers, but that doesn’t mean I didn’t rush home to shower to get that slight dirty feeling washed off!***

*I'm pregnant and have found myself losing words, phrases and even entire thoughts. I lost this second point when I originally sat down to write this post a few days ago and was so very frustrated! I wrote the rest of the blog without the second thought, but was determined to get the thought back again. Out of nowhere tonight while sitting on the news desk, the thought popped into my head! Just had to share cause I'm too excited not to!

**I know my Twitter stream is being monitored by other journalists and media outlets. I'm always aware of what I'm posting. I protect exclusivity when necessary. There have been events I'll Tweet about knowing I won't be able to send a news crew to it. In that case I share all information knowing full well what I'm Tweeting may be the tip off to another media outlet to send a crew.

***Who am I kidding? I'm pregnant and currently still exhausted ALL THE TIME. I didn't take a shower when I got home. I ate a little something to stave off the nausea through the night and I went straight to bed.

If you're willing collaborative journalism is easy and rewarding

Tue, 12 Jan 2010 03:27:21 +0100

Media organizations have partnered for as long as I can remember. CBS4 News used to partner with The Rocky Mountain News before it closed. Now the station partners with The Denver Business Journal. KUSA and KMGH also partner with local print organizations. There are various partnerships with local radio stations as well. These partnerships will continue but need to go beyond media organization to media organization.

Collaboration is a term being used more these days to describe a wide variety of media partnerships and ways to share information. Almost every article I’ve read regarding the future of journalism involves collaboration. I too believe collaborative efforts will shape the future of news. I believe this because I’m already collaborating with people outside of the newsroom to cover the news where the end result is truly fulfilling.

When a scanner failure in the newsroom prevented me from hearing police search for suspects in a home invasion and shooting, people on Twitter relayed what they were hearing to me. Brandon Harper, a follower of CBS4 News on Twitter, sent a Tweet to the station asking if we were listening to the scanners. I immediately replied explaining I knew of the situation, but couldn’t hear it. I asked him to share the information he was hearing.

Then I went to his Twitter stream to see if he’d said anything else about it. I found that he was listening to the scanner through an application on his iPhone. To say the least I was quite frustrated that a phone application could pick up the scanner channels when I couldn’t. I shared my frustration on Twitter and soon Kevin Boulas, a friend and follower, sent me a Tweet saying he bought the application and asked if there was any news he could share.

I’m pretty sure he was joking about this, but I jumped on the chance to have him act as my ears. He gladly did so putting out over 30 tweets and 17 direct messages to me relaying what he was hearing. I ReTweeted some of what Boulas and Harper relayed to me, but more importantly I directed people to follow them. I wanted everyone to know who was saying what and who was helping me. I made it very clear I couldn’t cover the situation as well without their help.

David Hayes another Twitter follower also picked up some scanner chatter on his Blackberry application and shared it. Soon several people were Tweeting with me and with Boulas about what was happening. The information shared kept those on Twitter informed. I was able to keep the news photographers that had been sent up-to-date with the information as well. I can't stress how important it is that I'm able to share that kind of information with the news crews. Above all, it keeps them safe and able to stay out of the way of the police doing their jobs.

People on Twitter have helped cover the news in this way before from sharing scanner chatter to letting me know what's happening in their neighborhoods. Now collaborative journalism can't just be me taking from those around me. I, and other journalists, need to give back beyond just sharing the news stories we're working on, or the scanner chatter I'm hearing. Ways I do this:

Share press releases and information, that may not ever make a newscast or be on the Web site, on Twitter and facebook.
Answer questions whenever possible, even if question doesn't involve a news story.
Open to taking story tips and press releases.
Provide additional information.

Providing additional information goes beyond me just posting or Tweeting it. Last week the Parker Police Department sent a press release to the station regarding a search for a home burglary suspect. A few hours after receiving the press release I saw a local Examiner article on the police search. The article didn't include a mug shot of the suspect. I checked the Parker Police site and saw the release was there, but not the picture.

I sent Chrissy Morin, author, a Twitter Direct Message asking if she had the photo, and if not if she would like the photo. I then uploaded the photo to TwitPic, and included a link to her article in the photo description. Morin responded to my DM soon after and provided her email address. I forwarded her the police press release.

I see that Morin so kindly attributed the picture to me in her article, but honestly I don't think this was needed. The mug shot was provided by the police to be used by all media. I saw no problem in sharing it with Morin because it wasn't my or the station's property.

From social networking to sharing public information with bloggers, citizen journalists and other non-traditional media organizations we can truly collaborate in journalistic efforts. The end result being a richer, fuller, more in-depth picture and story.

(Thankfully the next day it was determined the scanners on the news desk weren't being beaten by cell phone applications. An entire block of emergency channels had somehow been locked out from the appropriate scanner. That problem solved. I've requested speakers for one of the computers on the news desk so if there ever is a failure again we can try to listen to the scanner on the Internet.)

Scanner resources:

Internet: Radio Reference
BlackBerry: BlackBerry Scanner
iPhone: Emergency Scanner
iPhone: Scanner 911

New TV faces because of unexpected bridge between viewer and news

Wed, 23 Dec 2009 02:40:44 +0100

Face it. There are a lot of new faces on TV News in Denver. Last week I was one of those new faces as I did a live question and answer session with the anchors during the 6pm newscast. The following day I was live in two newscasts talking social media and the station’s Emergency Toy Drive.

The morning I was in the first newscast, and before I knew I was going to be on the news, I spoke to a group of local business leaders about using social networks in the newsroom. We also discussed how roles are changing in the newsroom.

Many factors including budgets and multiple journalistic skills (shoot, edit, write, etc.) have contributed to this change of who you see day to day on the news. For CBS4 News a reason is social media. The station’s brand is centralized around the viewer more than ever as viewers are encouraged and welcomed to interact with the station in many ways through social networks.

I was stunned into silence once when I was told, “When I think of channel 4, I think of you.” I had to really think about that to even partly understand what had happened. I created a personal brand within the station brand without even realizing it. I am a real connection between the news and the viewer/news consumer. I have shown that real people work in the news beyond those that you see on the TV. Others on the CBS4 Social Media Team, like Mike Nunez, have done the same.

Branding talent within a news station is not a new concept. Anchors specifically have always carried the brand, at least the face of the brand. You may have grown up in a household that only watched one station because your parents liked those anchors better than any others on TV. It really didn’t matter which station had the better storytelling or more factual news. As long as the news was being given to you by the anchor you trusted and liked, you were happy to receive it.

I think over the years trust in the media has shifted. I’m not sure many can still say they fully trust their favorite news personalities. While you may have gotten to know them, there was little to no getting-to- know-you in return.

Social networking allows that reciprocation of giving and receiving. I’m open, honest and real. I give back, listen and share. I don’t tell you what to think or tell you what your only news is. I may not have met many of those who are friends through social networks, but real relationships have developed.

Even though how people get their news has changed vastly over the years, television viewing itself has not. The Nielsen Wire says “TV viewing is up by about 20% over the last decade.” Our relationship may compel you to actually watch a newscast you’ve never tried before.

A friend and fellow journalist called me after watching my first appearance in a newscast. He said, “Wow, Misty, you just became the actual bridge between your social media friends to the news. You just gave them a reason to watch.” I told him he was crazy, but then I thought about it. There is no denying there is something special about seeing your friend on the news. You’ll turn on the news just to cheer on your friend and give support.

This was the furthest thing from my mind when I started sharing the newsroom in a new way on Twitter and then on facebook. I have never aspired to be on the news. However, the current TV news business model still revolves around TV viewership numbers. Just as the branding of main anchors once played a heavy role which newscast you watched, these new personal brands created through social media can do the same.

Seeking advice for a Twitter dilemma

Wed, 23 Dec 2009 02:47:52 +0100

There are very few reasons I block anyone from facebook or Twitter. Pure spam. Porn. Insults just because I’m a member of the media. These types of accounts I block.

I’ve never stopped any other journalist or news organization from following me; not even direct competition. To do so goes against all I preach about using social networks. Plus I want to follow them to see what they’re doing!

One local journalist has a public account but has blocked me and @cbs4denver. I’m guessing this journalist has done the same for other competition. I don’t believe in this practice, but I can't specifically say it's wrong either.

Today however a new local media Twitter account started following me. Then name indicates it’s a private account for a media organization, not a individual journalist. I’ve requested to follow the account since it’s following me. My request hasn’t been accepted yet.

The name of the account indicates its purpose is for breaking news. I don’t know if it just follows or actually tweets breaking news. I do know I don’t like it. It feels like I’m being used because I’m not allowed access. It really does feel different to me when it’s a two-way situation.

So I am considering blocking this account from my account. Of course I know there are other ways the person responsible for that account can monitor my tweets. That person could easily have another account that has nothing to do with media and is following me. I’d have no idea then. That’s the nature of the game.

However a private media organization account seems to be breaking the rules; well, my rules anyway. I sit here and am torn. What do you think I should do? Let this account follow me even if I’m never allowed to follow it? Block the account?

I share press releases as news content

Thu, 17 Dec 2009 03:26:51 +0100

This week’s Journchat was lively as usual. Question one lead to a good discussion on press releases used as news. (You can view the Archived Chat. Question one and the comments start at 7:07pm.) I answered as soon as I saw the question.

Last night was a no brainer. As I’m shouting out to coworkers about an email from Denver Police on a missing grandmother and her two-year old grandson, I’m saving the press release, a PDF file, so I can upload the release to Twitdoc. I knew the Web team would have an article posted quickly, but getting the press release out was quicker. I was able to post it in my Twitter as well as @cbs4denver.

I waited a few minutes to see if the Tweets were picked up and ReTweeted by others. When I saw very little movement with either Tweet I started to Direct Message my Twitter followers who had recently been active. I said: “Help? #MISSING CHILD w/his Grandmother who has alzheimers. http://twitdoc.com/c/wyxgr2 #Denver PLS RT!!!” In this kind of situation I have no problems asking for others to help spread the word. At this point it’s about the information, not about me nor the station.

Several directly ReTweeted me after that and others reworded or just posted the information in their Tweets.

Minutes after my initial Tweet the Web team had a story posted. I sent another Tweet on @cbs4denver with a link to the story.

Finally the information was being shared by many on Twitter.

Again in this situation it’s all about getting the vital search information and pictures out to the public in whatever way possible. The press release alone provided that information and no other information was available. The Web team wrote a story from that information.

When a press release provides even a bit of content that we’re using to tell the story I believe the press release can be shared as is. Beyond being the quickest way to share the initial and official information, it also shows transparency. Many organizations, including government offices and emergency departments, make their press releases available on their Web sites. Sharing the press release shows exactly what we have to work with to tell the story. After that it is up to us to delve further into the story to find more information.

I’ve already written "PR plea: help me help you. Please." in which I ask PR professionals to provide press releases on their Web site. There are many events and much information the public should know and it’s impossible for any media outlet to cover it all. I believe by sharing the information I’m empowering the public. They can take that information and do more on their own with it, such as attend an event they didn’t know about originally, or conduct their own research further into a topic, or even request the media to do a story.

I am using Google Wave, the mess that it is, for news

Tue, 08 Dec 2009 23:51:41 +0100

I’ve spent the last two weeks playing around in Google Wave. I see its potential as a collaborative tool to share information during news events, such as a snow storm. I see it being used as a comment tool much like people comment on facebook or retweet with a comment on Twitter.

I’ve joined waves that were created to discuss the use of social media and/or Google Wave in journalism and in news. I’ve reviewed other media outlets use of Google Wave. I’ve read articles on using Google Wave in news.

Do I get it? Not completely. Frankly I look at a wave and I think MESS. There are aspects that are still too difficult. I’d like to be able to search for public waves without having to type with:public before the search term or phrase. I’d like to be able to have more of a profile area so I can see a short bio of those I’m waving with. I’d like to be able to block certain wavers. (I’ve already been hit on in a wave.) I know some of what I’m asking exists in the form of applications, like applications you’d use with facebook, but I’d like it to be much easier than having to find and add an application or bot to the wave. Then there's the simple fact that wave is still in beta and not open to all yet.

The Seattle Times used Google Wave to share information during the manhunt for the suspect who gunned down four Lakewood, Washington cops. I heard about the wave before the suspect had been found. The wave was hard to follow and had a lot of side conversation in it; including a conversation if sharing police scanner traffic was legal or not. Yes this gave me a headache. I continued to watch it develop though. I saw how certain wave members were going through and editing along the way to update information and delete old or inaccurate information. I don’t know, but my guess is these wavers are Seattle Times staff members.

After all of that I see how Google Wave could be used as a news tool. I’ve just started my first public wave, Colorado Snow, to be a place to share information during an expected snow storm. I am anxious and excited to see how it will work.

My one huge hesitation with fully using Google Wave to share the news is that every single entry can be edited, can be changed, and can be deleted by every person in the wave. Yes, you can hit a playback button to see exactly how the wave was formed, but if there are many entries in the wave, the playback feature isn’t practical. It’s slow. I don’t believe people will take the time to go through the wave edit by edit. I believe people will read the wave as it is.

I trust most everyone I chat with on Twitter and facebook. It’s the unknowns that make me wary. A public wave is open to everyone, just like Twitter. Anyone can jump in on the conversation. The difference is my original tweet can’t be changed. If I’m retweeted and the tweet is changed, it’s pretty easy to jump to my Twitter stream to see exactly what I’ve said. It’s not that easy with Google Wave.

The rest of my hesitations I’ve realized can be the same as using any social network. For example, there is no official moderator of any wave. Well there’s no moderator for Twitter or facebook either. You can delete comments, and respond to comments. Same can be said for Wave. Newsrooms that realize sharing news via social networks means you don’t have total control over the story, and are able to let the story take its own form through those who add to it, will succeed in staying a relevant and news entity.

So Google Wave I will give you a try.

Bad journalism and bad Twitter critique frustrates me

Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:32:25 +0100

By now I believe my social media mantra is clear. Be smart. If you choose to use social media in any capacity know why, know your purpose and be smart in all you do. I need to extend my “be smart” advice to media that decides to critique social media use.

Saturday morning while curled up under a blanket on the couch and sipping a mug of coffee I scrolled through Twitter on my cell phone. I saw a Tweet from @DaveWebb that said The Colorado Independent had called out The Denver Post for its use of Twitter.

I immediately clicked the link to the article and read away. (A screen shot of the article is below. I firmly believe the Colorado Independent should correct if not remove the article. If that happens, I want you to be able to read the original) The article, really the editorial, apparently copied and pasted an alleged Twitter conversation the Denver Post had in reaction to a Tweet from Senator Schultheis.

My very first reaction was, “I can’t believe I missed this Twitter conversation! How could I have missed this? I didn’t even know this Denver Post account existed! How did I miss it?”

If I hadn’t known from Dave’s Tweet that he’d left a comment, I would have immediately searched for the Denver Post Twitter account and for those specific Tweets. Instead, I scrolled past the ads at the bottom of the article to read Dave’s comment. It actually took me a minute to process what he said. “This was just a mock-up...”

Without even thinking I moved from my very comfortable couch to go downstairs to the computer to continue looking into the article. I went to The Denver Post article to see for myself. From the article it’s not obvious this is a mock conversation. I can see how people could believe this was an actual Twitter conversation; especially someone who doesn’t use Twitter. Next I searched for a @DenverPost_EdBoard Twitter account. It doesn’t exist.

I found myself in a state of disbelief and even anger. My chest tightened as I realized how wrong author John Tomasic and The Colorado Independent were in these accusations, “This is not really what Twittering is all about. This is overkill. These are the tweets of a dad trying to be cool. Ugh. Colorado. It’s all so embarrassing.”

I walked back up the stairs and re assumed my position on the couch. I sat in silence as I continued to sip my coffee and sort through all of my thoughts. Once I felt I could rationally form a response, I went back to the computer so I could compose my comment.

Days have gone by and just thinking about the editorial and to know it hasn't been taken down or corrected, at the time of this post, frustrates me. I want to shout in every newsroom, into the ear of every journalist, that Twitter and social media networks are here, are being used, and we in the media need to have an open mind as we try to figure out or role in it or use of it. Not everyone is ready to use social media. Those people shouldn't force it or they'll just end up creating a mess for themselves, even a mess for their companies.

An editorial like this tells me the author, even the media outlet, doesn't truly understand social media yet. A lack of understanding though is no excuse not to work through the steps to research and verify facts before anything is written. Basic Journalism 101 was completely overlooked.

Use social media, but don't give away your competitive edge.

Sat, 14 Nov 2009 02:37:47 +0100

I’ve made it obvious that I believe traditional media should use social media. I advocate knowing why you’re using social networks, have goals and have strategies to reach those goals. So I find myself a little surprised at the thoughts that went through my head this afternoon. Is it possible to tweet too much?

If you’re giving away your competitive edge, yes you can tweet too much.

When I share what’s happening for me on the news desk and in the newsroom I am always aware that I have to protect the product: the story. I think first, “is what I’m sharing going to give any of our edge away, and if so, is this a big story we care about if we give specific details about process?” From there I decide to tweet or not to tweet.

The station learned of New Life Worship Center fatal van accident in Oregon when the story crossed the Associated Press Wires. I immediately shared the headline and a link to an Oregon newspaper on Twitter. Then I checked the Twitter streams for local media outlets and Oregon outlets. I also did a few word searches to see if I could find anyone talking about the accident. I found a reporter tweeting away as the story unfolded, but he/she just wasn’t sharing publicly released details, he/she was tweeting how the station was covering the story.

I’ve cut out the Twitter identity and links that would direct you to the station Web site. I have no desire to call out an individual. This is just a discussion.

I didn’t even know there were conflicting reports. I told the reporter and producers to double check what information we had on why the group was traveling and where they were headed in Oregon.

I didn’t know there was an Oregon church taking in crash victims. From this I knew their story would include sound from this Pastor. I thought about what we had and what we wanted to tell the story. I told the producers about it. We decided this was not sound we needed for our story as we were already at the house of one of the victims to interview the family.

It was nice to know the competing station had this sound though. Soon we were told of the church in Oregon assisting the victims from the Oregon State Patrol. Competitively knowing what we had verses what they had, it felt like we had the better interview.

I wondered what else they had, or if the reporter was tweeting it all away. Of course I was hoping for the latter! As of their early newscasts, it seemed the tweets were giving away all they had as I didn’t see anything more in their stories.

The moment we heard of the crash we knew this would be a big story, even a lead story. I knew all the stations would be working to cover it and to find out something the other stations didn’t. I think sharing the information that an Oregon church was assisting the crash victims was a good move. The reporter was sharing new information with his/her followers.

I don’t think I would have shared the interview with the Pastor until it had been posted on our Web site. That interview could have been the competitive edge. While Twitter is an amazing tool, this reporter has only 300 or so followers. I actually find myself asking if sharing the potentially exclusive interview with 300 or so followers was worth it. I checked their Web site, that interview wasn’t in their Web story yet. If we didn’t have our own interview that we felt trumped the Pastor interview, I would have immediately called the Pastor to request our own interview. A bell in my head would have went off, “ding, ding the Pastor already talked to one station, he’d probably talk to us!”

Then I saw this tweet and a whole other kind of bell went off; actually, it was more like a fog horn really.

I am slightly familiar with NLWC and had never once thought of them having any connection with New Life Church in Colorado Springs. If this was true, it would be an interesting tidbit, but I don’t believe we would have made a connection between the two tragedies, which are so different. But, because of this tweet I contacted NLC and was told there was not any connection or affiliation between the two churches.

I just shook my head at this. The information was stated as fact, not as this is what we’re checking. I can’t stress enough that every way you distribute news should be held to the same standards as what you put on the Web or on the air. Just because it’s Twitter doesn’t mean you can put out false information. Mistakes happen. I’ve made them. I try to avoid them at all times but when needed I always follow with a correction.

The reporter sent over a dozen tweets on the van accident. The tweets shared information as it became public knowledge; even tweeted live during a press conference at the church. This is an excellent use of Twitter!

As I’ve said before, being smart is the key to utilizing social networks. Be aware of what you’re sharing and who could see it. If you’re not using social media competitively, then don’t give away your competitive edge.

Concept: provide news packages when they're ready, not after they've aired on the news

Wed, 11 Nov 2009 23:08:53 +0100

I talked with a reporter last week about social media and the news. She kept asking, “can social media get us another ratings point?” I said that it could by simply connecting our product to new viewers who are using social networks, but that it would be hard to analyze the numbers. Numbers don’t tell us why we get numbers. Could it be our promotions? Could it be our community efforts? Could it be our efforts on social media? The analytics just aren’t there like they are with the Internet where every click can be tracked. (If I’m wrong and there is a way, PLEASE tell me!)

My question back to the reporter was, “why are we constrained to TV only?” She couldn’t fathom any other world other than the TV news world of designated shows and deadlines. I think her line of thinking is completely wrong. TV news and deadlines aren’t going away anytime soon. While the number of households with Internet has tripled from 1997 – 2007, not every household has internet. (I take calls weekly from people complaining that the news puts all the resources on the Web. They complain because they don’t have Internet access.) Also according to NielsenWire, “Despite the array of options, television continues to be the primary way Americans of all ages consume media.” So I see why the reporter can’t picture a future without set newscasts that compete against each other.

I do though. Information moves and weaves through social networks at lightning speed. In light of this, I believe newscasts are becoming like the newspapers, the news source that is reporting old news. I asked the reporter, “Why can’t full and complete stories that are ready before the newscast be made available on the Web site at that moment?” She looked at me like I was crazy. Her answer again was numbers. “If you make content available early, why would anyone watch the news?”

Sure we may lose some viewers, but overall those that are consuming news primarily through the Internet now, aren’t going to turn on the TV anyway. We can still make money with advertising and sponsors on the Web site and attached to the stories. No, I’m not an expert; I’m not a marketer; I’m not an ads woman or sales associate, but I honestly don’t see the why this wouldn’t work. I do know the business world is full of numbers. Analytics are concrete numbers. If we start making content available before newscasts, we will create an audience advertiser and sponsors want to reach.

I don’t have all the answers. My Magic 8 Ball laughs at me when I ask it about the future of news, just like it laughs at me when I ask it about Colorado weather. I just believe those of us in the news industry must be searching for ways to stay relevant. News isn’t going away. People will search for news sources and good content. Whether we like it or not we must now find ways to reach those people instead of relying on them finding us.

Facebook News Feed finally makes sense... sort of

Tue, 03 Nov 2009 05:31:44 +0100

I normally don’t like the changes facebook rolls out as it tries to expand and evolve. No, I don’t fully understand the different feeds in facebook. Until tonight the two feeds, Live and News, have been bothersome, filled with stuff I just don’t care to see, and items I can’t figure out how to not see (like who friends who.) Tonight though, I actually saw a benefit of the News Feed.

Early in my shift On the News Desk I posted a status update that was really a request for Molly Hughes. I was trying to help her find people to interview for a story. I received many comments and suggestions throughout the night. I was amazed the conversation kept going. Then it hit me, the conversation continued because it had shown up in others’ News Feeds; where the most popular updates are supposed to go. (I think… again, I’m still figuring it out.)

If it hadn’t been in the News Feeds, there may have been fewer comments, fewer suggestions and possible sources. So if I’m right, I sort of see the light of the News Feeds.