text:
UN chief lauds Qatar and Kuwait initiatives
Belgian envoy lauds Qatar initiatives on R&D and sustainable development
WISH presents patient safety study at Pak conference
Taiwan offers solutions in green technology for Qatar
Qatar welcomes Yemen peace talks
KQIC launches online retail platform
QATAR UN chief lauds
HH the Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani held a meeting with Yemeni President Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi and UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon
By Ramesh Mathew/Staff Reporter
United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon yesterday urged global and regional powers to prevail upon the warring parties in Syria to end the conflict in the country, while lauding the initiatives of the governments of Qatar and Kuwait in resolving the devastating crisis.
He made the observations while delivering the keynote address at the opening of the 16th Doha Forum.
HH the Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani was present at the opening ceremony.
Also present were HE the Prime Minister and Minister of Interior Sheikh Abdullah bin Nasser bin Khalifa al -Thani, several heads of states, ministers and senior officials.
The Doha Forum is being held under the title "Stability and Prosperity for All".
Stressing the importance of peace and stability to have prosperity around the world, including in this region, Ban said that conflicts, terrorism and the absence of basic freedom for people in war-torn countries in the Middle East and its neighbourhood were causing considerable hardships and it was high time the major players used their influence to prevail upon the warring parties.
He urged the powers to play a more proactive role in establishing peace and stability in places that had been hit hard by armed conflicts and terrorism for years.
He noted that the world was passing through its most turbulent phase since World War II and more than 130mn people required some kind of life-saving medicine and other similar assistance on a regular basis for survival in view of the perils of the ongoing armed conflicts.
The continuing turbulence in Libya, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Afghanistan, he said, was taking a heavy toll on their economies and causing extensive loss of lives.
Against this backdrop, every country was duty-bound to prevent warring parties in each war zone from causing further escalation in their respective territories and outside, he said.
Highlighting the need to build accountable institutions at different levels to ensure sustainable development across the world, the UN official recalled the promises made towards that end by several world leaders at the 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference, COP 21-CMP 11, in Paris.
He sounded optimistic that a forthcoming summit in Istanbul would see many global leaders turning their aspirations to provide a better life into real action by helping revive order, peace and stability in some of the war-torn countries.
Speaking earlier, the president of the 70th Session of the UN General Assembly, Mogens Lykketoft, hoped that the Doha Forum would help address some of the common global challenges, such as terrorism, poverty, unemployment and environmental degradation, effectively.
Lykketoft said that many occurrences of the past had made the UN firmly believe that no effective and practicable solution to any issue was possible without the collective efforts of different countries.
No government on its own can solve such problems, adding that only teamwork involving more than one player can help the world tide over major crises.
HE the Minister of Foreign Affairs Sheikh Mohamed bin Abdulrahman al-Thani, Mauritius President Ameenah Gurib-Fakim, Afghanistan President Ashraf Ghani and Niger President Mahamadou Issoufou were among the speakers at the inaugural function.
HH the Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani held a meeting with Yemeni President Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi and UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on the sidelines of the 16th Doha Forum yesterday evening. Discussions at the meeting at Doha's Sheraton Hotel dealt with the latest developments in Yemen and the peace talks hosted by Kuwait, particularly with regard to finding a solution for the return of Yemen's legitimate government delegation to the talks. The Yemeni president agreed, during the meeting, for the resumption of the Yemen's legitimate government delegation to the talks on the UN guarantee to ensure that those talks would be in accordance with the Security Council resolution No 2216. The UN secretary-general thanked the Emir for his good offices that led to persuade the Yemeni president to return the legitimate government delegation to Kuwait talks. The Emir also met with a number of participants of the Doha Forum.


This workshop is jointly sponsored by the APA Committee on Aging (CONA) and the APA Continuing Education Committee.
Describe the general concepts about capacity in law, and specifically about capacity assessment in guardianship law and practice.
Summarize key neurocognitive disorders of aging and how they impact capacity and delineate the role of memory, judgment and awareness in capacity functioning.
List four legal standards for consent capacity and their application in a case.
Describe a framework for evaluations relative to guardianship of person/independent living as well as sexual consent.
Define and distinguish financial capacity, financial exploitation and undue influence.
Describe how to form a capacity opinion and how it differs from other clinical opinions and delineate what courts are seeking in written and oral testimony, especially in legal disputes.


AFC office hours are 7:30 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. The main office can be reached by phone at 891-3092, ext. 100.
No red or blue clothes, shoes, belts, etc.
No facial piercings including earrings may be worn to school. No large jewelry (large chains or medallions) may be worn to school.
Academy For Change has these rules in place to provide a more positive learning environment for your student. Please take some time to remind your student to come ready and prepared for school.
No gum is allowed on campus!
Any electronic devices such as iPods, walkmans, etc. cannot be used during class time. AFC is not responsible for theft or loss of these devices.
No outside drinks on campus. This includes energy drinks and coffee in the morning!
Cell phones are acceptable, but the cell number must be registered in the office, and may only be used with staff permission.
Any student caught using his or her cell phone during school time, including texting, will have their phone taken away. The phone will only be returned to a parent or guardian.
Students should have a pencil, but should leave their backpacks at home.
If you have any questions regarding this information, please contact AFC at 891-3092.
We have been very busy here working on a new link for our menus, meal applications, online payment center and carb counts for our diabetic population. If you would please add the following URL to your websites for a connection this information, that would be great.
The AFC Asbestos Management Plan can be found here.


text:
The newsonomics of a New York Times + CNN combination
Mark Thompson faces a defining and daunting challenge: Lead The New York Times on that thin tightrope to a new stability, one tethered to the digital world. We've seen lots of good ideas already freely offered to the incoming NYT CEO. Let me offer a new one.
Let's imagine what a New York Times/CNN combination would look like — and what it could do for both companies. Combination? Yes, a purposely squishy word. I'm not talking about a merger of the companies. I'm thinking about what each company offers the other strategically, at this point in media history, and how each could see its business advanced. We'll leave the messy details of corporate development, of partnership, of joint venture, for a later day.
So why put these two entities closer together? Two big reasons provide some logic.
First, the marketplace is pushing companies toward convergence. The worlds of completely separate TV (video), newspapers/magazines (text), and radio (audio) have simply been overwhelmed by the reality of consumption devices that bring all three together for us — the iPad being the current crown of creation. But the legacy roots of each medium has made it really tough to either (re-)build truly multi-platform companies or forge newspaper/TV alliances (Tampa, Chicago, etc.) that work. Logic compels greater multi-platform creation; inevitably that will mean new combinations of legacy companies, even as legacy companies try to remake themselves internally.
Second, both CNN and The New York Times fill in numerous of the other's weaknesses. At this digital moment when "mobile" and the tablet are tossing old habits up in the air and forcing consumers to re-form new ones, it's a great time for both the Times and CNN to double down on their native advantages, and make their products no-brainer top-three places to go in the news everywhere-and-anywhere world.
For CNN, a partnership could be part of a strategy to reclaim its mojo after seeing TV ratings drop to 21-year lows. For the Times, having turned small corners in the last year, it's a way to increase its sense of momentum, separating itself from the pack of other top news sources.
The timing is near-perfect. Mark Thompson, after all, comes to the Times as a broadcaster. With a 33-year TV career, he knows TV, and he knows the Times is just beginning to escape its print roots. Scaling the wall of video/TV, where huge revenues still exist, is one of his daunting challenges. He is one of the few people who could have taken the job who brings both a broadcast background and one of airtight news credibility, given the BBC's standards. He is the perfect person to imagine a strong video/TV presence for the next-gen Times. The Times is looking currently at what a major investment in video would look like; how does it climb the incremental mountain with the next generations of TimesCasts?
CNN is searching for recently resigned president Jim Walton's successor. While the 32-year-old network's staff debates the realities and fantasies, and CNN-directed truths, of Aaron Sorkin's "The Newsroom," the once top-of-the-heap TV news source faces a fundamental identity crisis and big strategic moment. It has wavered along hard/soft news lines and in programming choices, spun into a dither by Fox News' Roger Ailes and MSNBC's Phil Griffin.
Now the next CNN president must renew brand purpose and internal pride. Focus on news — especially adding to its forte of who, what, and where the why and how aspects of news as it has been edging into (The Freedom Project, an award-winning series on human trafficking, and Saving Aesha, for example) — or play with more entertainment/personality positioning? Worry about the Foxes and the MSNBCs, or grab the moment of the greatest potential global news reach technology and literacy has ever made possible?
There are smaller plays for both, to be sure. CNN's been around the block with CBS News, talking news merger, but those talks foundered on issues of control and culture. The Times has tried all manner of tests, from longer-standing ones with Google to newer ones with Flipboard.
What both need is a game changer: a move that will simultaneously do three things:
Rocket it ahead of the news competition, as consumers decide those handful of must-go-to news sources they'll visit each day, across their many screens.
Add a large new dimension of content to its current brand. While both the Times and CNN have lots of content, both — as is the case of all news companies — can use more to satisfy insatiable digital reading appetites.
Create a strong, new revenue line, as both see traditional lines weakened by market change.
Before I get to how a game-changer may work, let's try this as a simplified chart to compare the two companies:
The New York Times CNN Brand Ascendant; mobile apps have now separated NYT from other "newspapers"; digital circulation has newly marked NYT as innovator Ubiquitous in U.S. and worldwide; its image — what it stands for — is unclear Top leadership CEO Mark Thompson begins in November Search on for replacement for President Jim Walton Audience Top-five web site; newspaper circulation flat Top-three web site; TV ratings at 21-year low Revenue Reader revenue, newly revived and growing, with all-access digital circulation programs; online advertising under pricing pressure, and by ad marketplace change; print advertising in 5-10 percent annual decline. Net loss of $39.7 million (2011) Cable/satellite fees, increasingly threatened by low ratings and the potential unbundling of forced consumer packages; advertising, on air and online, both under pricing pressure by ad marketplace change. Profit of $600 million (est. 2012) Global Times moving that way, with ~10 percent of paying digital-only customers outside U.S.; new China site By definition, global and recognized globally. Great worldwide distribution and name recognition TV culture/experience Experimenting, unevenly, with "video" It's a TV company Text culture/experience It's a newspaper company Experimenting, unevenly, with "text" Content Deep, authoritative, agenda-setting; fairly good breadth, but the deep web is exposing its areas of weakness Immediate, wide, truly global, largely authoritative; good breadth, and worldwide, though subpar to AP Access to TV platforms Minimal Ubiquitous Revenue sources Readers, advertisers Cable/satellite cos., advertisers Aggregator chops Little developed; a powerful potential for adding breadth to its brand Little developed, but it bought top-three tablet aggregator Zite Community-generated content Fledgling efforts have gone awry CNN's iReport is a prototype for user-generated reporting; if those CNN/Mashable talks work their way to completion, CNN would have a leg up on social media journalism Wire Longstanding NYT wire and syndicate are mature Newer CNN wire fighting for place in market
There's clearly a complementarity here that makes sense — on paper. How might it work in reality?
It's easiest to see how the two might exploit two green fields, areas so new neither has as much ego or business invested.
If we look at the coming five screens of access, it is the emerging two — connected TV and connected car — that are most virgin, while laptop/desktop, smartphone and tablet are already deeply competitive. Both connected TV and connected car offer many new product opportunities and access to new revenue. A partnership could focus on those two, as the least threatening way to combine smarts and assets.
More immediately, we could see a new focus on tablet and smartphone products. For starters:
Next-generation news video products for the tablet: The Wall Street Journal has burst out of its word box this year with a major emphasis on video. It has just begun to leverage its deep journalistic expertise, though the presentation is still more talking head than "TV." Combining the beat expertise of New York Times journalists with CNN TV smarts — and its own formidable behind-the-scenes journalistic workforce — offers breakout potential for tablet video news. CNN's journalist workforce numbers is a hard number to compare to the Times' 1,150 journalists; how do you count those who provide the technology to present the journalism? Yet CNN's journalists often get short shrift in the press, which favors endless Wolf Blitzer and Anderson Cooper stories. Here's one area where print is superior: In the breadth of The New York Times' Sunday edition, for instance, you can see the great stretch of its journalistic talent. With the flat screen of the TV or the computer or tablet, you can't see the rich CNN reporting behind its facade.
The leading global news product: Everyone from Bloomberg to the FT and BBC and from the Journal to the Times and the Guardian, is now moving on the vast global opportunity (English-speaking and otherwise). No longer must the Brits be satisfied with their one percent of the world market, or Americans with five percent. Here both CNN and the Times are among the top contenders. With 32 journalists outside the U.S. and 24 foreign bureaus, the Times has maintained a global presence, when most of its print brethren have severely cut back. CNN's 33 foreign bureaus and vast carriage across the world lay continued claim to its birthright. If you are overseas and watch CNN International, it's a night-and-day different product than CNN U.S.; adding the Times to the mix would lengthen its international lead.
Reinventing the "wire": CNN's wire, launched in 2009, marked its emergence from AP. The goal: compete with AP, leveraging its substantial journalistic investment with syndication, selling the same content to many, many others. That wire, like many competitors to AP and Reuters, has found tough going against the incumbents. Meanwhile, The New York Times' wire and syndicate face the same struggles of most in that niche wire business: maturity at best, holding on to as much of the old, dwindling print world as they can. A combined "wire," focusing on those next-generation syndicatable digital/mobile products, could harvest joint assets well.
Then, there's the web in general and TV, the former where both engage in head-to-head combat and the latter in which CNN, though struggling, is the incumbent and NYT the wannabe. The hurdles to cooperation, there, are highest, though the payoff may be the greatest.
For CNN, the questions would be: How could TV people harness the added depth of The New York Times' report and intelligence? How could it marry its video and text in new state-of-the-art ways?
While CNN is now much more profitable than the Times, the fragmentation and disruption of TV business models is happening quickly (see "The newsonomics of breakthrough digital TV, from Aereo to Dyle and MundoFox to Google Fiber TV"). A Times partnership could help CNN find ways to create new news and information products that consumers will pay for, as the Times has now nimbly done, with its digital circulation initiative.
For The New York Times, the questions would be: How could text-based journalists move into the next generation of multimedia storytelling, bringing over their craft and standards, but learning new skills? How could video be graft onto the Times DNA, make the Times the company it needs to be in the next age?
How could the Times tap into the revenue stream of TV access, either through programming that cable and satellite companies would pay then for, as they pay Time Warner/CNN? It isn't as if Times reporters haven't been well-used on broadcast. NPR does a masterful job of that, but the Times gets no revenue out of the relationship. That's the key: wringing TV money out of a deal.
For both, the tasty intangible: Would a combination of two of the best brands in news world reinforce and heighten each side's? Of course, there are lots of reasons why it wouldn't, couldn't or shouldn't work. Yet, it if did, it would give real meaning to convergence — finally — as the old demarcations of print and TV fast erode.
It's easy to tick off the numerous factors that make it difficult: control, valuation and culture top the list. It's at least, though, a whiteboard exercise that allocates strengths and deficits, opportunities and challenges over a five-year time span. That's the level of thinking, and timespan, that Mark Thompson will need to bring to the Times, as will CNN's new chief when she or he arrives in Atlanta.
Tags: Columns Featured Art Associated Press Bloomberg CBS News CNN CNN Wire Fox News FT iPad m2e MSNBC New York Times Newsonomics newspapers Phil Griffin Reuters roger ailes Wall Street Journal
The newsonomics of breakthrough digital TV, from Aereo to Dyle and MundoFox to Google Fiber
In 1998, when Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. bought the Los Angeles Dodgers, the storied franchise was worth $380 million. News Corp. sold the team in 2003 for $430 million. After winning the ability to negotiate a new multi-billion sports TV contract this fall, they sold earlier this year for $2 billion, blowing the lid off sports property values.
In 1994, the San Diego Padres were worth $80 million. After recently signing a 20-year deal with Fox Sports for $1.2 billion, they sold (pending league approval) for $800 million.
Meanwhile, in 2000, the Los Angeles Times was worth at least $1.5 billion when it was sold as part of Times Mirror to Tribune Company. Today, as it is newly readied for market out of the Tribune bankruptcy, it would go for something less than $250 million. The San Diego Union-Tribune, once valued near a billion dollars, sold for about $35 million in 2009 and about $110 million in 2011.
It's a reversal of fortune: Newspaper franchises that once outvalued baseball teams by 3-1 or 5-1 or 10-1 now see the inverse of that ratio. Why?
Two letters: TV.
Those numbers tell us a lot about the continuing power of television, in worth, in value creation, and in the news business itself. If we look just at recent events in the ongoing transformation of broadcast and cable to digital, we now see multiple breakthroughs on their path to digital. They give us indications of what the news business, video and text, will look like in the coming years. While we can argue endlessly about the relative virtues and vices of print and TV news, we must acknowledge the relative ascendance of TV and think about what that means for the news business overall.
TV's revenues are holding up far better than newspaper companies', and TV is better positioned to survive the great digital disruption.
TV has continued to have great audience. Nearly three in four Americans tune in to local TV news at least weekly, surpassing newspaper penetration, even as Pew Research points out they mainly do it for three topics: breaking news, weather, and traffic. Further, it retains great ad strength — 42 percent of national ad spending, matching the actual number of minutes Americans spend with the medium and making it the only medium still ahead of digital spending as digital has surpassed print (newspapers + magazines this year, both in the U.S. and globally). Yes, TV remains a gorilla. While Netflix won headlines when it announced it had streamed one billion hours of TV and movies in a single month, that huge number compared to about 43 billion hours of U.S. TV consumption, according to Nielsen's 4Q 2011 Cross-Platform report.
In a nutshell, that's the difference between TV and video, circa 2012. Video is the next wave — incorporating TV perhaps, but still the very young kid on the block.
Today, TV is no longer a box. Sure, even with all the Rokus, Boxees, and Apple TVs, it seems like TV isn't yet an out-of-the-box experience. But with Hulu, Netflix, and Comcast's Xfinity, it's emerging quickly, escaping our fixed idea of what it once was — the boob tube in the living room. If it's not just a box anymore, it's a platform. From that platform, we see both the disruptors and the incumbents doubling down their bets. As in most things digital, few of these launches will be huge winners — but some will drive big breakthroughs. Some of the iconic legacy companies we've long known will be absorbed in the woodwork as new brands supplant them. Consider the spate of recent innovation, as we quickly assess the newsonomics going forward:
NBC, bashed up and down Twitter, nonetheless proved out a new business model with its multi-platform approach to Olympics coverage. Whatever you think of the tape delays or the suspended reality of Bob Costas' gaze, NBC made the economics work, surprising itself and others. Its live streaming has ratified the development of cable- and satellite-authenticated, all-access digital delivery. That reinforces cable/satellite value. Further, it whetted prime-time viewing appetites, boosting ratings and earning NBC more ad revenue than it had projected. That's icing on the cake for NBC, which, under Comcast ownership, has rocketed forward in digital strategy. The network has made a number of moves to transform itself into a global, video-forward, digital news company, joining the Digital Dozen global news pack. Recently, it bought out Microsoft's share of msnbc.com, a leading Internet news portal. It immediately rechristened it NBCNews.com. In short order, it appointed Patricia Fili-Krushel as the new head of NBCUniversal News Group, an entity made up of NBC News, CNBC, MSNBC, and the Weather Channel. A former president of ABC, with 10 years of experience at Time Warner, she heads a growing news operation. Earlier this year, NBC combined its sports properties into a unified NBC Sports Group, merging NBC's broadcast sports unit and Comcast's regional sports networks. NBC is growing out of its digital adolescence. (See "One year after she was hired, Vivian Schiller's 'wild ride' at NBC is just beginning.")
Aereo, the TV startup funded by media magnate Barry Diller, is expanding its footprint from its current New York City base, and starting to offer multiple promotional deals. Diller's in-your-face challenge to over-the-air broadcasters (CBS, NBC, Fox, ABC, CW, PBS) takes their signals and delivers that programming via the Internet. It charges consumers $12 a month, or as little as a dollar a day. They can then watch those TV stations on up to five devices; in addition, they can deliver these signals to a TV via Apple TV or Roku. Aereo also offers DVR capability, with 40 hours of storage. It's classic disruption, with Aereo upping the pressure on the cable bundle and messing with the "retrans" fees that broadcasters get from cable companies to run their programming. Is it really legal, as a court recently found? It may be as legal as Google presenting snippets from every publisher and directory provider.
Local broadcasters — representing a broad swath of ownership groups organized in a newer company called Pearl — are bringing local TV to our mobile devices themselves. Just a week ago, Metro PCS started selling a Samsung Galaxy S phone with a TV receiver chip in 12 markets. That's just the first push of Mobile Content Ventures, a collection of Pearl, NBC, Fox, and others. Expect mobile TV, marketed as Dyle, to be available for other phones and tablets, either with built-in chips or after-market accessories — although price points are an issue, with $100-plus premiums likely over the next year. So what does this innovation mean? Simply, that broadcasters are going direct to mobile consumers — no Internet needed, no data charges applying, and maybe providing more consistent video connectivity — with live programming; whatever is on TV at that moment is also on your phone or tablet. Broadcasters just use part of their digital signal to, uh, broadcast to us on our phones. It's that antenna, and its cost, that's the issue. Business questions abound. Given the timing of the launch, Dyle seems like an aspiring Aereo killer, and certainly broadcasters would like to see it do that, if further court action doesn't. More deeply, though, broadcasters want to maintain their direct-to-consumer brand identity as they do a balancing act and try to keep those retrans fees from cable and satellite companies. They don't want to be left out of the digital party.
Social TV pulls up a chair. First it was startup Second Screen, matching tablet ads to real-time TV viewing. Now ConnecTV, partnered with Pearl, is trying to corner the activity as it takes off. Its promise: "synchronization of local news, weather, sports, and entertainment programming along with social polls." Ah, synchronicity, a Holy Grail of our digital aspirations. Last week, Cory Bergman (a man of at least three full-time digital lives, with MSNBC, Next Door Media, and Lost Remote) sold his Last Remote social-TV site to Mediabistro.
Then there's the disruptor of everything on planet Earth, Google. The company recently announced it is putting another $200 million into YouTube Channels, building on its initial $150 million investment. The move emphasizes how quickly YouTube is growing beyond its homegrown, user-generated roots. Now partnering with dozens of prime video producers, creating more than 100 new channels, it is trying to establish itself in viewers' lives as a go-to video aggregation source. Major video producers are still wary of Google getting between them and their customers, both ad and viewer, but many others are signed on. Meanwhile, in Kansas City, Google Fiber TV (TV that's healthier for you?) launches. It's a rocket shot at the cable, telco, and satellite incumbents. It's also a demonstration project: providing more, cheaper. The more: interactive search for TV that combs your DVR and third-party services such as Netflix. (Yes, The Singularity ["The newsonomics of Google ad singularity"] marches on.) Google Fiber TV combines DVR and third-party (Netflix-plus) search. Its DVR holds 500 hours of storage of shows in 1080p and the ability to record eight TV shows simultaneously. Bandwidthpalooza. Google's goal: Toss a hand grenade among the TV-as-usual business models, and pick up some of the pieces, adding new significant revenue lines.
CNN moves to break out of its identity funk, figuring out what that powerful global brand means in this fast-changing digital news world. CNN President Jim Walton recently stepped down, clearly acknowledging that his 10-year run had reached an end. "CNN needs new thinking," he said in a farewell note. On TV, CNN has been beaten up badly both both Fox News and MSNBC. In 2Q, CNN showed its worst numbers in 20 years, down 35 percent year-over-year. On the web, it'a a top-three news player. But overall, it's become the Rodney Dangerfield of news entities, getting little respect. Its cable fees — the strength of its revenues — could be challenged by low ratings. Going forward and competing against other global news brands — many of which are transitioning their own businesses to gain far greater digital reader revenue — it is, at this moment, caught betwixt and between. How it brings together a single — and global — digital/TV identity is at the core of its continuing journalistic importance and financial performance.
That's a short list. We could easily add HuffPo's streaming initiative and The Wall Street Journal's wider video embrace. Or Les Moonves' digital moves at CBS. And Fox's new MundoFox, Spanish-language TV network, taking on Telemundo and Impremedia. The new network, at birth, offers a strong digital component, working at launch with advertisers along those lines. Let's note some quick takeaways here, all of which we'll be talking about in 2013:
Note how much you see the names News Corp. and Fox here. While segregating its text assets (and liabilities), News Corp. is investing greatly in the video future.
Cable bundling's longevity is uncertain. There's a lot of residual power here, but we know how quickly that can fade in legacy media. Yes, the unbundling of cable and satellite has been overestimated by some, as Peter Kafka pointed out recently. Yet, these multiple digital strategies may still push a tipping point. Clearly, legacy TV media, despite their public protestations, sees that potential and is acting in multiple ways to prepare for it.
Though broadcasters are making major digital pushes, they start from a lowly digital position. Many broadcasters can count no more than 5 percent of their total revenues coming from digital. That compares to 15-20 percent or more for newspaper companies. While there are other sources of revenue have been more stable than those of newspapers, they need to grow digital revenues quickly to make up for inevitable erosion of older money streams.
TV ≠ newspapers. Much of broadcasters' revenues are made on non-news programming, as much as one-half to two-thirds for most local broadcasters. While learning from TV experience here is useful, given lots of differences, the learnings must be smartly applied. As news consumers and advertisers move increasingly digital, though, that thick line that separate local TV from local newspapers thins by the day.
The all-access, news-anywhere, entertainment-everywhere era has created a new massive business competition. Which brands will be top of mind? Who will consumers pay? How valuable is news itself in this contest?
Comcast, Time Warner, Verizon, AT&T — pipes companies — are in one corner. CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, Fox, HBO, Showtime, and other known-to-consumer brands in another. Aggregators like Netflix and Hulu over there. Media marketers like Amazon and Apple holding court. Google. The local broadcasters fighting for their place in this digital ring. This new battle of brands, in and around "TV," is now joined.
Tags: Columns advertising Aereo aggregation AllThingsD Amazon Apple Apple TV AT&T audience Barry Diller Boxee business model CBS CNN Comcast Comcast Xfinity ConnecTv Cory Bergman Fox Google Google Fiber HBO Hulu iPad Jim Walton Les Moonves Lost Remote m2e Metro PCS mobile Mobile Content Ventures MSNBC MundoFox NBC Sports NBCNews Netflix New York Times News Corp. Newsonomics newspapers Next Door Media online advertising Patricia Fili-Krushel paywall Pearl Peter Kafka Pew Research Roku second screen Showtime Time Warner Verizon Wall Street Journal You Tube Channels
One year since she was hired, Vivian Schiller's "wild ride" at NBC is just beginning
If you ever find yourself awake past the witching hour, sleeplessly scrolling Twitter, take comfort in knowing that NBC News chief digital strategist Vivian Schiller is right there with you.
"I'm up for two or three hours in the middle of the night," Schiller told me. "But my saving grace is Twitter."
Schiller has been with the network for just over a year now. If it's her job that keeps her up at night, she says it's not for lack of satisfaction with it. After a difficult resignation as CEO of NPR, she's happy at NBC — "incredibly happy," actually — and excited about the changes that are taking place there.
The big one happened earlier this month when NBC bought back control of the MSNBC.com website and rebranded it NBCNews.com. (MSNBC — the cable television channel — will launch its own site in 2013.) Of course on a larger scale, it's the industry itself that's changing.
In Schiller's words: "If you don't disrupt yourself, someone's going to disrupt you."
And disruption is built into her job, which focuses on change, experimentation, and recalibration. That means embracing a try-anything-but-fail-fast mentality, taking the best of what works and hopefully turning it into something even better.
With #NBCFail trending in recent days, the Internet has been busy complaining about the network's coverage of the Olympics thus far. Schiller said that she has nothing to do with the Olympics, but she's also taken to Twitter to defend the coverage.
+1 @jonathanwald the medal for most Olympic whining goes to everyone complaining about what happens every 4 yrs, tape delay @brianstelter
— Vivian Schiller (@VivianSchiller) July 29, 2012
I spoke with Schiller last week before the games got under way. Here's our conversation, lightly edited and compressed.
Adrienne LaFrance: A little over one year in, how's it going? What's your prevailing mood? Update me.
Vivian Schiller: My prevailing mood is incredibly happy — I feel like I'm suddenly talking to a psychiatrist — but I'm generally a very happy person anyway. I went through some unhappy times, as you know. But I just love it here. I know that makes me sound like I'm being sort of a corporate goody two-shoes but I seriously love it here. I've now worked at five big media companies, and I can tell you that this has been spectacularly great.
LaFrance: What's something you expected — or didn't expect — coming in that you've since learned about NBC?
Schiller: Well it's funny because — and I certainly didn't plan it this way — but as it's turned out in my career, I've worked for a company that is in every platform, and the one hole was broadcast television. I was in cable television, I was in newspapers, digital, radio. So coming into a broadcast news organization, I knew that the culture would be different than cable television, no question. And I knew that NBC News has this very storied legacy.
I maybe had just the slightest concern — before I actually started to meet with people — because NBC News is so successful, and because of the unusual relationship we had with our website, how would digital be embraced? How would I be embraced? But I will tell you that vanished instantly, as soon as I started working here. I've seen just about every corporate culture there is. One of the things I love about it here is it's very collaborative. People are rewarded for sharing and being nice to each other, as opposed to in some places that's not the case.
LaFrance: I always like to ask people about their news consumption habits, when you wake up, where you look first, that kind of thing.
Schiller: It's a sore subject. The last few months, I'm up for two or three hours in the middle of the night. But my saving grace is Twitter. It's quite sick. I wake up in the middle of the night. I don't know why. You could say, 'Oh, there's a lot of stress at work,' but there's always stress at work. Maybe it's age. I don't know what it is. So what's the first thing I look at in the morning? Really what I look at in the middle of the night and first thing in the morning is Twitter. It is my news feed. It's a quick take on whatever's going, including frankly NBC's own news. So, Twitter. And I have a Breaking News app on my iPhone, and I look at that.
"The answer to everything is not always technology. It's about technology married with trusted journalism…"
In my apartment in New York, I must admit I do not have like seven monitors set up in my apartment. I toggle back and forth between The Today Show and Morning Joe. I know this sounds rather old-fashioned but I get a bunch of email newsletters still. You know, paidContent, Mediabistro. Mind you, I was general manager of NYTimes.com, but I am still incredibly stuck to my habit of reading The New York Times in print. It doesn't mean that I don't also follow NYTimes.com on Twitter and look at the website, but I do read it in print. I just really like to read it in print.
LaFrance: If someone were trying to get a sense of the scope of NBC's digital efforts, where would you first direct them?
Schiller: I mean I guess the one place would be NBCNews.com but I don't want to create a false hierarchy by saying that. This is the way the digital world works, and it would be foolish of us not to serve various audiences. All of them adhere to the same journalistic standards. That's the one immutable constant across everything we do: our journalistic standards. Whatever we do — hard news, soft news, breaking news — anything that we do, it all meets those same standards, regardless of what the coverage is. That's the one constant.
From there, I want each property to have their own voice. The Grio has a voice. NBC Latino has a voice. Today has a voice. What was MSNBC.com and is now NBCNews.com, we're going to evolve that site to have more of NBC News's voice. NBC News on television has a voice. We're looking to evolve the site — and when I say 'the site' I mean everything that we do: mobile, our social extensions — to have a little bit more of that voice. Of course when the new site for cable launches, certainly MSNBC cable has a voice, and you will see that reflected in the site.
LaFrance: In a conference call last week, you and [NBC News President] Steve Capus talked about how amid this transition to NBCNews.com, the thing that will continue will be a commitment to journalism. What recent hard news stories — or reporting packages, series, whatever it may be — come to mind for you as really exceptional demonstrations or that commitment?
Schiller: One of the more recent ones, we did a digital-only series called What the World Thinks of Us. It's a series of videos from around the world, what people there think about the U.S., which is an incredibly timely issue, especially with a presidential campaign going on.
The web staff, the web journalists, do a tremendous amount. I think frankly we don't do a good enough job, or haven't done a good enough job, promoting or surfacing a lot of the extraordinary journalism that's done that doesn't appear on television. It's certainly not just a companion to TV, and it's not a commodity news site. It's a place for exclusive, original, personal, in-depth content that — because time is a limited resource — can't necessarily go on television.
We have reporters who are digital reporters — I mean, they are reporters, period, full stop — who are covering beats that heretofore NBC News hasn't had desks for. Travel, for example. Consumer business. NBC News has not until now had dedicated reporters on some of these issues. We have now [through acquiring what was previously MSNBC.com] just gained desks and beats who are doing original reporting. There not just doing aggregating, not that there's anything wrong with aggregating. We just expanded overnight our reporting ranks.
LaFrance: You said the digital side of things isn't just a companion to television. But as we've been tracking tablet use and smartphone use, and as I'm sure you're aware, people are watching TV while they engage with these devices. How do you factor that in?
Schiller: I'm really glad you asked that. 'Second screen' is the new buzzword. The whole concept of a more formalized approach to second screen is going to really explode over the next two years. You've seen the same statistics I have. While people are watching television, they're engaging with a second and even a third screen. It's astounding how many people have two screens. They might have their desktop or laptop and their mobile device or whatever it might be.
Audiences have created their own ad-hoc experiences, and created their own second-screen experiences through Twitter and Facebook while they're watching television. We've seen that happen.
Nobody ever went broke following audience behavior and audience desire. So that hasn't been lost on us either. What is the opportunity? If we know that people are watching our programs and engaging with them on Twitter, well, that says to me, couldn't we create a better experience for them that's customized to simultaneously watching television and, say, engaging with a tablet? We've launched a couple of efforts, one of them an experiment with Dateline — that's sort of a quasi second-screen experience. We do a lot on Twitter of course.
We are not ready to talk about the details, but we are actively looking at the opportunities to tie more closely what you see on television to what you're experiencing on your second screen so that we can close the circle of being able to tap into your community, to your social network. Frankly, look — we're in an advertising-supported business. What are the opportunities for advertisers in terms of going back and forth between the second screen or the third screen? That's a huge area of focus. Watch that space.
LaFrance: The Dateline experiment — was that the Chatline feature?
Schiller: Yes. I'm a big believer in test-and-learn model of innovation. We're trying stuff. We're trying lots and lots of stuff and you know going in some of it's going to work, some of it isn't going to work. Hey, if things don't work, as long as you figure out quickly and stop doing them. The whole fail-fast philosophy. We want to try a lot of things.
LaFrance: So with Chatline, are you trying to appeal to people who maybe aren't active on Twitter, so they want a narrower, pre-set experience? Or is it people who are so comfortable with Twitter that they're willing to go all over the place? I'm not quite sure who would be the target audience.
Schiller: The ideal is you want to satisfy both. Anything that we do will involve people's social networks: Twitter and Facebook. Nobody will tolerate being forced to choose between a dedicated experience that doesn't include Twitter, and then having to go back and forth to Twitter. That's not serving the audience very well. Everything we do will have an integrated experience.
People already have communities. I do not believe there is room for another player to come and say, 'Create a new proprietary network of your friends on our site.' I think that would be a complete waste of time, and a dead end, and a losing proposition. So we need to engage the social networks that people already have into our experiences.
LaFrance: You said something to the effect of 'nobody goes broke following what the audience wants' but people are still trying to figure out how to balance audience wants and advertising needs. Another way to ask this: Will I ever be able to livestream Meet the Press?
Schiller: It is challenging. We want to make sure that we don't inadvertently hurt our affiliate partners but you raise a good question, and we're all feeling our way through that. We're experimenting a lot. I think the key to everything is to experiment.
A lot of times, I think sort of the history of digital media over the last decade and a half or two decades is unwarranted fear of cannibalization. People who think, 'Oh, if we put something online, people will stop consuming X, whatever it is." In some cases, yes, that's true. But you can't stop the tide. If you don't disrupt yourself, someone's going to disrupt you.
It's not a zero-sum game in the sense that just because you put something online, I don't think people look at it as a binary decision between 'Do I consume it online or do I consume it on pick-your-legacy-business?' What we've seen is more content is being consumed and both of those experiences can be equally valid to people.
LaFrance: I'm curious to hear how all of this will carry over to election coverage, and what you're most excited about NBC trying in that spirit of experimentation that will distinguish 2012 coverage from 2008.
Schiller: We're trying a lot of stuff. We had relationships with Facebook on the debates. We had relationships with foursquare, with Twitter. We still have some more things we'll be rolling out. We launched our NBC Politics site and our NBC politics iPad app. We've created interactive experiences around delegate maps.
Look, I don't want to say that other news organizations are not doing a lot of those same things. But we have so many trusted voices within NBC News on politics. What we're doing is we're saying, these are your guides that you've always trusted on television, so we're going to make them available on every platform. That is really what is going to differentiate us. The answer to everything is not always technology. It's about technology married with trusted journalism and the trusted voices who have been leading us through umpteen political races over many decades.
LaFrance: With some distance from NPR now, how are you looking some of the challenges that public radio faces as distinct from the challenges TV faces?
Schiller: Well, the obvious one is government funding, and I was chagrined to see recently that the calls to cut funding for public broadcasting are back in full force. I see my former colleagues going up to the Hill again to testify again. I feel for them. That's a really tough position to be in. Frankly, I'm glad not to have to ask the government for money. It's challenging on many fronts. It becomes very politically fraught. It is politically fraught. Nobody knows that better than I do, personally. It's challenging — I want to phrase this carefully — I think it is complicated when an independent news organization takes money from federal, state, and local government. I think that's challenging for an independent news organization which covers those entities.
LaFrance: From the TV side, what's a challenge that's more pronounced now?
Schiller: Well actually, the same challenge we had at NPR and cable TV, which was writing for the web — it's not the same as writing for television and radio. We didn't have that problem at The New York Times. But in all seriousness, that's a surmountable challenge.
LaFrance: And since you mentioned The New York Times, I have to ask about your sense of how things are working there, specifically with the paywall.
Schiller: I will tell you as now an outsider but still a loyal reader of The New York Times. The newspaper has never been better. I don't work there. They don't pay me to say that. Even if they did pay me to say it, I wouldn't say it if I didn't believe it was true. I think the news report has never been better. I find it really indispensable. I think the latest paywall — the porous, metered model — is really working well. I worry for them though. I'm not saying anything they don't know, but all of the key indicators are going in a different direction. It's a national treasure, so I'm sure they will find away.
LaFrance: Last question for you: What's the most recent example of something you saw another news organization do that made you think, 'Oh, I wish we did that,' or that otherwise wowed you?
Schiller: Gosh, do I have to pick one?
LaFrance: Pick as many as you'd like.
Schiller: I love some of the news parodies that Slate is doing. I think those are really cool. The New York Times does spectacularly well with their interactive data-driven graphics. Some of the incredibly in-depth data-driven investigative reporting coming out of ProPublica is amazing. There's a lot that I admire. I wish that we could do all of it, and I hope that we get to a point where we can. You'll see a lot of change as well roll out some changes, as we launch the cable site. It will be a wild ride. It will be great.
Tags: Regular post digital newsroom mobile MSNBC MSNBC.com NBC News NBCNews.com second screen Steve Capus Vivian Schiller
Why CNN's digital strength may cause problems for Fox News
paidContent :: CNN has become a prime-time ratings afterthought in the cable news business it started three decades ago, as Fox News continues to dominate a traditional television realm mostly supported by older viewers. But online and on mobile, the tables are turned. Driven by a flurry of big breaking-news events in 2011 – everything from the Japanese tsunami to the Egyptian uprising – Time Warner-owned CNN Digital averaged 73 million unique viewers a month last year across its various platforms, according to comScore, far more than Fox News Channel and MSNBC.
Continue to read Daniel Frankel, paidcontent.org
Tags: CNN Fox MSNBC Time Warner
A huge problem - "CNN leaves it there" leaves viewers stranded and helpless
PressThink :: CNN thinks of itself as the "straight down the middle" network, the non-partisan alternative, the one that isn't Left and isn't Right. But defining itself as "not MSNBC" and "not Fox" begs the question of what CNN actually is. To the people who run it, the answer is obvious: real journalism! That's what CNN is. Or as they used to say "the news is the star."
Right. But too often, on-air hosts for the network will let someone from one side of a dispute describe the world their way, then let the other side describe the world their way, and when the two worlds, so described, turn out to be incommensurate or even polar opposites, what happens?… CNN leaves it there. Viewers are left stranded and helpless.
CNN's problem - continue to read Jay Rosen, pressthink.org
Tags: CNN Future of Journalismus Fox News MSNBC
The Newsonomics of news anywhere
[Each week, our friend Ken Doctor — author of Newsonomics and longtime watcher of the business side of digital news — writes about the economics of the news business for the Lab.]
Facebook isn't trying to replace Gmail or Yahoo Mail — it's just trying to bring a little order to our world, right? This week's Facebook Messages announcement is stunningly simple, and in line with the next phase of the web, both overall and for news.
Take MSNBC's description of Facebook Messages:
Instead of dealing with the dilemma of reaching people via e-mail or direct message or SMS, all of these will be combined, so that you'll be able to reach someone the way they prefer to be reached, without you having to think about it. 'All you need is a person and a message,' said Andrew Bosworth, director of engineering for Facebook.
That's the next web (r)evolution in a nutshell. It's a unified theory of messaging. And it can be easily extended into the unified theories of TV, movies, shopping — and news.
Make a few substitutions, and you've got "All you need is a person and a movie," or "All you need is a person and a shopping list" or "All you need is a person and the news." For news creators, and aggregators, it's a big thought that will be play out more dramatically in the tablet-inflected world of 2011. Only those who grok its meaning and execute properly may make digital reader revenue a reality.
In short, it's about simplification, about interconnection, about consolidation, and it's a principle that is beginning to — and should — form the foundation of the much of the next-generation thinking about the news business.
Though we'll continue to see a panorama of new digital services and products, much of the early digital vision has been built out. We may live in a find-anything-anytime-anywhere world, but it's also a digital fumbleathon, as we bounce from mobile apps of three distinct platforms, mail and preference settings, interminable demands for passwords, multiple hard-to-combine "friend" and contact lists, Twitter decks, Facebook walls, RSS feeds, preference popups, security hiccups — not to mention TV remotes and cable guides that seem like visitors from a distant analog planet.
Facebook Messages says: We get it. We'll make it easier for you to keep in touch with those you want to stay in touch with. We'll see how well Facebook delivers on that promise, but it's the right one for our age. We can see its echoes multiplying.
On Wednesday, HBO announced that its HBO Go initiative will make HBO available through digital devices for its cable channels subscribers by year's end. That initiative is part of parent Time Warner's TV Everywhere push, which likewise says: You paid us once. Now get what you paid for wherever you want it. It's the unification of the premium TV business, as cable companies are starting to see unprecedented churn, given piecemeal availability of programming through the Internet, legally or illegally.
Comcast is making a similar promise, as it newly announced app promises to connect up its customers' experience. The app's functionality is rolling out over time, but will ultimately allow viewing of all Comcast's Xfinity content via devices, plus provide programming services, such as remote DVR taping, and let an iPhone replace that dreaded remote — borrowing a little bit from Tivo, a little bit from Sonos.
Netflix, of course, grasped the concept earlier, as CEO Reed Hastings has noted ("Six Lessons for the News Industry from Reed Hastings"): "We knew that the DVD business was temporary when we founded the company. That's why we named it Netflix and not DVD by mail. We wanted to become Netflix." Netflix's current promise: "Unlimited TV." You guessed it: one relationship with the brand, and you get what you paid for however you want it.
Where are the news promises? Well, the first generation has been Yahoo News. Remember your first time seeing all those wondrous headline links from the BBC, the Post, the Hindu, and CNET all in one place? First-generation aggregation was cool, but we haven't really progressed much beyond it, though we've seen nuances, with personality added to aggregation (HuffPo) and some regional aggregation (Seattle Times, TBD.com). We've seen some good smartphone apps and a few new iPad apps. Come 2011, we'll begin to see more News Everywhere experiences.
The first big one in the U.S. should be The New York Times. The Times will launch its metered pay system early in the year. If tech issues can be solved, expect paying customers to get access — aiming toward seamless, but likely with a few wrinkles — across devices, an intending-to-be-unified reader experience. The Times' Martin Nisenholtz explained recently: "It's not just about the website anymore. It's about all of the brands where you can read the Times…it's about the website, smartphones, the slates, iPad…it's a hugely different world than it was five years ago." So, the Times will say give us a single price, and we'll let you read about you want of the Times where you want, recognizing you across digital experiences and — nirvana — allowing you to keep track of what you've shared and read, and with whom, without you having to recall whether you sent that story to your best buddy on your iPhone.
I've called that approach All-Access, and I think it's the news industry version of TV Everywhere. So far, the best example of all-access pricing is the Financial Times, upon whose experience the Times' model is built. Its "newspaper + online" top-of-the-line subscription allows full digital access plus the paper for one price.
The Everywhere notions seem friendly — and they have to be consumer friendly to be successful — but they're actually quite darwinian. How many entertainment and news brands will we pay for? Only a handful, probably, especially at premium rates. So in the news business, that battle means only a few brands win the reader revenue sweepstakes, unless a Hulu-for-news proposition (AP's digital rights clearinghouse expanded; a second life for Rupert Murdoch's Alesia?) succeeds big-time.
To win, news companies will have work on the principle of the Field Theory. No, not the unified field theory, though unification of message and of service is fundamental. It's the Sally Field Theory, which you remember the 1984 Oscars speech: "I've wanted more than anything to have your respect…I can't deny the fact that you like me, right now, you like me!" Well who wants renewed respect than newsies? Who keeps talking about the trusted brand relationship that newspapers have long had with readers?
If news companies want to "own" the news customer (and be able to mine his data deeply), then they, large or small, newly minted or history-encrusted, have to bring their games to a new level. For the Times (or the Journal), the current breadth of content may be sufficient, if the execution manages to bring a little delight of ubiquity to paying subscribers.
For local news companies, the bar is probably a different one. Yes, they'll have to put their tech development in high gear (many are woefully behind on tablet apps, just as the devices explode under this year's Christmas trees), but they'll also have to up their local value proposition. That means not just repurposing their own staff's local news output, but really reaching out to community blog aggregation, broadcast partnership, working Yelp-like guide magic (probably through partnership) and/or creating a new level of digitally enhanced local shopping experiences. It's unclear how much limited local news across devices is worth to news consumers.
News Anywhere, or unified news, or All-Access, whatever we want to call it, demands the singular focus, product development and messaging that Netflix, HBO, Comcast, and Facebook are bringing to it. Those are all skills that have been problematic in the news industry. Yet, here we are, in a new age, in a mobile news age about to unfold, giving the journalism, and journalists, another chance to get it right.
Tags: Small post aggregation Alesia Andrew Bosworth Apple Associated Press business model Comcast Comcast app Facebook Facebook Messages Gmail HBO Go Huffington Post iPad iPhone Jeff Bewkes Martin Nisenholtz MSNBC Netflix New York Times Newsonomics newspapers paywall Reed Hastings Rupert Murdoch Sally Field Seattle Times TBD Community Network TBD.com TV Everywhere TW Twitter Unified Field Theory Wall Street Journal Yahoo Mail Yahoo News
This Week in Review: An objectivity object lesson, a paywall is panned, and finding the blogger's voice
[Every Friday, Mark Coddington sums up the week's top stories about the future of news and the debates that grew up around them. —Josh]
Olbermann and objectivity: Another week, another journalist or pundit disciplined for violating a news organization's codes against appearances of bias: This week (actually, late last week) it was Keith Olbermann, liberal anchor and commentator for the cable news channel MSNBC, suspended for donating money to Democratic congressional candidates, in violation of NBC News policy. Olbermann issued an apology (though, as Forbes' Jeff Bercovici noted, it was laced with animus toward MSNBC), and returned to the air Tuesday. There were several pertinent peripheral bits to this story — Olbermann was reportedly suspended for his refusal to apologize on air, it's unclear whether NBC News' rules have actually applied to MSNBC, numerous other journalists have done just what Olbermann did — but that's the gist of it.
By now, we've all figured out what happens next: Scores of commentators weighed in on the appropriateness (or lack thereof) of Olbermann's suspension and NBC's ban on political contributions. The primary arguments boiled down to the ones expressed by Poynter's Bob Steele and NYU's Jay Rosen in this Los Angeles Times piece: On one side, donating to candidates means journalists are acting as political activists, which corrodes their role as fair, independent reporters in the public interest. On the other, being transparent is a better way for journalists to establish trust with audiences than putting on a mask of objectivity.
Generally falling in the first camp are fellow MSNBC host Rachel Maddow ("We're a news operation. The rules around here are part of how you know that."), Northeastern j-prof Dan Kennedy (though he tempered his criticism of Olbermann in a second post), and The New York Times' David Carr ("Why merely annotate events when you can tilt the playing field?"). The Columbia Journalism Review was somewhere in the middle, saying Olbermann shouldn't be above the rules, but wondering if those rules need to change.
There were plenty of voices in the second camp, including the American Journalism Review's Rem Rieder, Michael Kinsley at Politico, and Lehigh j-prof Jeremy Littau all arguing for transparency.
Slate media critic Jack Shafer used the flap to urge MSNBC to let Olbermann and Maddow fly free as well-reported, openly partisan shows in the vein of respected liberal and conservative political journals. Jay Rosen took the opportunity to explain his phrase "the view from nowhere," which tweaks traditional journalism's efforts to "advertise the viewlessness of the news producer" as a means of gaining trust. He advocates transparency instead, and Terry Heaton provided statistics showing that the majority of young adults don't mind journalists' bias, as long as they're upfront about it.
On The Media's Brooke Gladstone summed up the issue well: "Ultimately, it's the reporting that matters, reporting that is undistorted by attempts to appear objective, reporting that calls a lie a lie right after the lie, not in a box labeled "analysis," reporting that doesn't distort truth by treating unequal arguments equally."
Commodify your paywall: We talked quite a bit last week about the new numbers on the paywall at Rupert Murdoch's Times of London, and new items in that discussion kept popping up this week. The Times released a few more details (flattering ones, naturally) about its post-paywall web audience. Among the most interesting figures is that the percentage of U.K.-based visitors to The Times' site has more than doubled since February, rising to 75 percent. Post-paywall visitors are also visiting the website more frequently and are wealthier, according to News Corp.
Of course, the overall number of visitors is still way down, and the plan continued to draw heat. In a wide-ranging interview on Australian radio, Guardian editor Alan Rusbridger expressed surprise at the fact that The Times' print circulation dropped as their print-protectionist paywall went up. That, he said, "suggests to me that we overlook the degree to which the digital forms of our journalism act as a kind of sort of marketing device for the newspapers." ResourceWebs' Evan Britton gave five reasons why news paywalls won't work, and Kachingle founder Cynthia Typaldos argued that future news paywalls will be tapping into a limited pool of people willing to pay for news on the web, squeezing each other out of the same small market.
Clay Shirky used The Times' paywall as a basis for some smart thoughts about why newspaper paywalls don't work in general. The Times' paywall represents old thinking, Shirky wrote (and the standard argument against it has been around just as long), but The Times' paywall feels differently because it's being taken as a "referendum on the future." Shirky said The Times is turning itself into a newsletter, without making any fundamental modifications to its product or the basic economics of the web. "Paywalls do indeed help newspapers escape commodification, but only by ejecting the readers who think of the product as a commodity. This is, invariably, most of them," he wrote.
A conversation about blogging, voice, and ego: A singularly insightful conversation about blogging was sparked this week by Marc Ambinder, who wrote a thoughtful goodbye post at his long-running blog at The Atlantic. In it, Ambinder parsed out differences between good print journalism (ego-free, reliant on the unadorned facts for authority) and blogging (ego-intensive, requires the writer to inject himself into the narrative). With the switch from blogging to traditional reporting, Ambinder said, "I will no longer be compelled to turn every piece of prose into a personal, conclusive argument, to try and fit it into a coherent framework that belongs to a web-based personality called 'Marc Ambinder' that people read because it's 'Marc Ambinder,' rather than because it's good or interesting."
The folks at the fantastically written blog Snarkmarket used the post as a launching point for their own thoughts about the nature of blogging. Matt Thompson countered that Ambinder was reducing an incredibly diverse form into a single set of characteristics, taking particular exception to Ambinder's ego dichotomy. Tim Carmody mused on blogging, voice, and authorship; and Robin Sloan defended Ambinder's decision to leave the "Thunderdome of criticism" that is political blogging. If you care at all about blogging or writing for the web in general, make sure to give all four posts a thorough read.
TBD's (possible) content/aggregation conflict: The new Washington-based local news site TBD has been very closely watched since it was launched in August, and it hit its first big bump in the road late last week, as founding general manager Jim Brady resigned in quite a surprising move. In a memo to TBD employees, TBD owner Robert Allbritton (who also launched Politico) said Brady left because of "stylistic differences" with Allbritton. Despite the falling-out, Brady, a washingtonpost.com veteran, spoke highly of where TBD is headed in an email to staff and a few tweets.
But the immediate questions centered on the nature of those differences between Allbritton and Brady. FishbowlDC reported and Business Insider's Henry Blodget inferred from Allbritton's memo that the conflict came down to an original-content-centric model (Allbritton) and a more aggregation-based model (Brady). Brady declared his affirmation of both pieces — he told Poynter's Steve Myers he's pro-original content and the conflict wasn't old media/new media, but didn't go into many more details — but that didn't keep Blodget from taking the aggregation side: The web, he said, "has turned aggregation into a form of content–and a very valuable one at that." Lost Remote's Cory Bergman, meanwhile, noted that while creating content is expensive, Allbritton's made the necessary investments and made it profitable before with Politico.
A new iPad app and competitor: There were two substantive pieces of tablet-related news this week: First, The Washington Post released its iPad app, accompanying its launch with a fun ad most everyone seemed to enjoy. Poynter's Damon Kiesow wrote a quick summary of the app, which got a decent review from The Post's Rob Pegoraro. For you design geeks, Sarah Sampsel wrote two good posts about the app design process.
The other tablet tidbit was the release of Samsung's Galaxy Tab, which runs on Google's Android system. Kiesow rounded up a few of the initial reviews from All Things Digital (a real iPad competitor, though the iPad is better), The New York Times (beautiful with some frustrations), Wired (more convenient than the iPad, but has stability problems) and Gizmodo ("a grab bag of neglect, good intentions and poor execution"). Kiesow also added a few initial impressions of the Galaxy's implications for publishers, predicting that as it takes off, it will put pressure on publishers to move to HTML5 mobile websites, rather than developing native apps.
In other tablet news, MediaWeek looked at the excitement the iPad is generating within the media industry, but ESPN exec John Skipper isn't buying the hype, telling MarketWatch's Jon Friedman, "Whenever a new platform comes up, people want to take the old platform and transport it to the new platform." It didn't work on the Internet, Skipper said, it won't work on the iPad either.
Reading roundup: More thoughtful stuff about news and the web was written this week than most normal people have time to get to. Here's a sample:
— First, two pieces of news: First, word broke last night that Newsweek and The Daily Beast will be undergoing a 50-50 merger, with the Beast's Tina Brown taking over editorship of the new news org. The initial news accounts started to roll out late last night and into this morning at The New York Times, Washington Post, and NPR, who posted an interview with Brown. Obviously, this is a big, big story, and I'm sure I'll have much more commentary on it next week.
— Second, U.S. News & World Report announced last week that it's dropping its regular print edition and going essentially online-only, only printing single-topic special issues for newsstand sales. The best analysis on the move was at Advertising Age.
— Two great pieces on journalism's collaborative future: Guardian editor Alan Rusbridger in essay form, and UBC j-prof Alfred Hermida in audio and slide form.
— Poynter published an essay by NYU professor Clay Shirky on "the shock of inclusion" in journalism and the obsolescence of the term "consumer." Techdirt's Mike Masnick added a few quick thoughts of his own.
— Two cool posts on data journalism — an overview on its rise by The Columbia Journalism Review's Janet Paskin, and a list of great tools by Michelle Minkoff.
— Finally, two long thinkpieces on Facebook that, quite honestly, I haven't gotten to read yet — one by Zadie Smith at The New York Review of Books, and the other by The Atlantic's Alexis Madrigal. I'm going to spend some time with them this weekend, and I have a feeling you probably should, too.
Olbermann photo by Kirsten used under a Creative Commons license.
Tags: Regular post aggregation bias blogging Clay Shirky commodity news ego Galaxy Tab iPad iPad apps Jim Brady Keith Olbermann Marc Ambinder MSNBC objectivity original content paywalls Snarkmarket tablets TBD The Times transparency voice Washington Post
Hyperlocal aggregator Everyblock launches new widget
Hyperlocal news and information aggregator Everyblock has launched a new location-based widget targeted at local newspaper websites and blogs.
The widget allows third party sites to embed Everyblock's news and information feeds for specific areas on their own sites.
Posting on the Everyblock blog, co-founder Daniel X. O'Neil,, said: "Until today, we've had no official way to share content with other sites or to partner with news outlets in the cities we cover."
The site was created by Adrian Holovaty in 2008 as a hyperlocal news resource for neighbourhoods in Chicago, New York and San Francisco. It has since expanded to 16 US cities and was bought by MSNBC in August 2009.Similar Posts:
Everyblock launches in two new cities
Herald Online: AOL's hyperlocal network Patch gets charitable to fund community news
Craigslist spreads to 120 cities
Innovations in Journalism – Everyblock
YouTube and Google News come together for publishers
Tags: Online Journalism EveryBlock Hyperlocal msnbc widget Local media Adrian Holovaty
The newsonomics of replacing Larry King
I know. You say, who could ever replace Larry King? But I remind you that Larry's six ex-wives have already confronted that question.
Most of the speculation about a replacement has focused on a range of usual suspects, personalities from Katie Couric to Ryan Seacrest to Joy Behar to Piers Morgan — all around the question of who will be able to command a better audience than King, whose ratings have seen a steady decline. Indeed, his successor, who will take over the show in November, will probably come from that list, a month after the network plucked Eliot Spitzer and Kathleen Parker to fill Campbell Brown's spot.
Yet the changing economics of CNN's basic business model prompt lots of questions about ways CNN could go — as well as offering print- and broadcast-based news companies some pointers on their own business model development.
Let's recall that CNN is a tale of two modern stories. Its flagship cable news station has been flagging badly, having fallen to a #4 position in cable news behind Fox, MSNBC, and its own Headline News Network (HLN), tabloid TV without tabloid wit. CNN is cool and confused in an age of hot and pointed.
Online, though, CNN has built a formidable business. It ranks at or near the top of the top news sites, excels at user-gen news content and offers one of the few paid news apps.
It's a tale of two business units going opposite directions.
Look at the revenue pie for CNN, and you discover more nuance. One-half of CNN's roughly $500 million in revenue comes from what it calls business subscription fees — what cable companies pay it for carriage. Ten percent of its revenue is now coming from prime-time advertising; the same percentage from its digital businesses. Advertising outside prime time, international, and some syndication round out the revenue picture.
We can certainly see that CNN's revenue model is much more diverse than newspaper or broadcast companies. That payment from cable systems for carriage — averaging about 50 cents per subscriber per month, according to recent accounts — makes a huge difference in a time of great advertising change.
We can also see that CNN is becoming more and more of a content company. It gets paid that half dollar a month from cable companies because its inclusion helps drive subscribers. Recently dropping the Associated Press, it's moving increasingly into syndication, both video and text, and there the quality and breadth of content counts. As one of the first news companies to embrace multi-platform publishing (cable + desktop + mobile, long before others got that notion), it moved quickly to price its product for the iPhone, charging $1.99 and now ranking as the #2 news app in the iTunes store.
So content creation — and content creation that rebounds in digital waves, even if it starts from a cablecast — is more important to CNN every day. If it could come up with more programming that provided digital multipliers — smartphone and tablet users willing to pay for access, and advertisers joining them — then the Larry King replacement might be not just good TV, but good strategy.
What might that mean?
For instance, how could could CNN better leverage its substantial iReport operation, a user-generated innovation that is the gold standard for TV news. Viral user-gen video is a mainstay of the digital world. Or maybe it could create an America's Best News Videos (is Bob Saget available?), riffing on the montages that Jon Stewart has made almost mainstream. Maybe it could go The View-like, aggregating characters whose comments and rants might generate great two-three minute digital products. Or, most likely, it could find a bolt-out-of-the-blue digital age personality, like Rachel Maddow, who may well front MSNBC's first iPad app. As MSNBC's Mark Marvel told AllThingsD's Peter Kafka about its coming app, it will allow users to "engage with the host of that show." Engagement with Rachel, yes; with Larry, no. With Katie, maybe.
Can CNN find a digital upgrade to the analog King?
The goals here would be to produce great digital content, not just ratings. Sure, TV has seen some pick-up of memorable interviews — think CBS' Katie Couric and Sarah Palin, or more recently the half-million pageviews after-market that Maddow generated with her Rand Paul interview. That aftermarket, though, has been more of an afterthought. If revenue growth is in the digital content business, CNN, broadcasters, and all news producers must increasingly think at least digital rebound, if not digital first. As Stephen Covey legendarily said, "Begin with the end in mind." A good habit for highly effective media companies to adopt.
What else might print news companies learn from the CNN model?
First, syndication. While the Chicago News Cooperative and Bay Citizen pioneer innovative content syndication models, both with the New York Times, and Financial Times' direct licensing model breaks new ground, most newspaper companies have failed to find other new, lucrative markets for their content. Yes, they've made some money from enterprise and education licensing, but if their content is really that valuable, they should be able to find other companies (Comcast, NYT, regional businesses, and more) to pay them for it.
Second, the pay-per-subscriber model that has insulated CNN from the ravages of ad change is one news companies should ponder. CNN made itself an indispensable part of the cable mix. Is local/regional news content indispensable to any aggregators — AT&T, Verizon, Apple, Nokia, for instance — as they bundle technology and content? What would it take — in the kind and breadth of content (video?) produced — to get a monthly payment, especially in the mobile digital world to come?
Tags: Small post AP Apple Associated Press AT&T Bay Citizen Bob Saget Campbell Brown Chicago News Cooperative CNN iPhone app Comcast direct licensing Eliot Spitzer Financial Times Fox News HLN iReport Joy Behar Kathleen Parker Katie Couric Larry King Mark Marvel MSNBC New York Times Nokia Peter Kafka Piers Morgan Rachel Maddow Rand Paul Ryan Seacrest Sarah Palin Verizon
"Hulu Effect" Takes Hold at MSNBC.com: Longer Ads In Exchange for Uninterrupted Viewing
In the latest example of how online video advertising is becoming more precise, MNSBC.com is experimenting with a range of ad formats, ad lengths, and the time intervals to deliver them to Web consumers. That's what Mark Marvel, senior director of video at MSNBC.com told Andy last week.
MSNBC.com has worked closely with pharmaceutical advertiser Pfizer over the past 12 months to offer 60-second spots in exchange for watching six minutes of news videos commercial free, Marvel explained.
That's similar to a Hulu ad format that lets viewers opt in to watch a two-minute ad in exchange for no more ads during the rest of a 22-minute show, for instance. Web sites with premium video and TV shows, like MSNBC.com and Hulu, are testing different ad formats because of the shift to more longer-form viewing online that's been documented by research firms like comScore.
Marvel said MSNBC.com is also experimenting with the variety of ad formats it can serve up during different viewing time intervals. There could be any number of combinations, such as interactive ads, bugs under the player, or even keyword-based ads that might appear during a show, but would be delivered at reasonable "time-based intervals," he said.
Marvel will be a participant in tomorrow's Beet.TV Online Video Roundtable.
Daisy Whitney, Senior Producer
Tags: Advertising commercial free video Hulu Mark Marvel MSNBC video advertising
Huffington Post: MSNBC suspends its 'inappropriate' tweeter for filming CNN pilot
MSNBC has "indefinitely" suspended its news anchor David Shuster for filming a new pilot for CNN, Huffington Post (and others) report.
Schuster had also got into trouble for a tweet sent to the conservative activist James O'Keefe in January; it was deemed "inappropriate" by the channel, adds HuffPo.
Full post at this link…
12 hours worth of radio interview tips from @NewsLeader
Common Sense Journalism: Tweets and a news 'story' – stop confounding the two
Bloggasm: How much original reporting on HuffPo's front page?
Huffington Post: HuffPost launches 'social news'
HuffPo doesn't like being linked to… really?
Tags: Broadcasting Social media and blogging james o'keefe msnbc Editors' pick david schuster CNN
Poynter: MSNBC narrative slideshow garners 78m page views
After researching the strange story of a very wealthy, elderly American heiress, veteran MSNBC investigative reporter Bill Dedman decided to experiment with the presentation of his article. Rather than turn in a few thousand words of copy as usual, Dedman put together almost 50 photographs in a slideshow and accompanied them with captions.
The result, The Clarks: an American story of wealth, scandal and mystery, is not groundbreaking in its approach to storytelling, but the response to the story is a powerful testament to the power of visual reportage.
Dedman reported that he received 500 email from readers about the story, more than any other story he has written, and it has had around 78 million page views, more than any other story on MSNBC.com.
Poynter's Steve Myers has an interview with Dedman on the story at this link…
MSNBC's Charlie Tillinghast: 'There are no TV journalists anymore. There are videojournalists'
MSNBC on hyperlocal plans for interactive coverage of US election voting results
Malcolm Coles: MPs' expenses – the best of the web
Mirror's video partnership with Roo 'a bloody mess' claims former site editor
Online Journalism Scandinavia: Waiting for the CAR to arrive
Tags: us Multimedia Online Journalism MSNBC Interactive News LLC msnbc.com msnbc Editors' pick bill dedman investigative journalism slideshow
msnbc.com: Msnbc.com acquires 'Breakingnews.com'
"The digital network that includes msnbc.com on Tuesday announced the acquisition of the BreakingNews.com Web address, with the aim of creating a Web site to complement its @breakingnews alert service on Twitter."
Tags: Twitter del.icio.us Links links msnbc

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


NEW YORK– Joe Girardi's tenure as New York Yankees manager ended Thursday after a decade that produced just one World Series title for a team that expects to win every year.
"Everything this organization does is done with careful and thorough consideration, and we've decided to pursue alternatives for the managerial position," Cashman said in a statement.
The 53-year-old Girardi led a young squad on a surprising run to an AL wild-card berth this year with a 91-71 record, the team's best since 2012. New York beat Minnesota in the wild-card game, then fell behind Cleveland 2-0 in the Division Series. Girardi admitted he made a mistake not asking for a video replay review in Game 2.
Girardi's 910-710 regular season record with the Yankees is sixth in victories managing the team behind Joe McCarthy (1,460), Torre (1,173), Casey Stengel (1,149), Miller Huggins (1,067) and Ralph Houk (944).


text:
Berryville – miasto w Stanach Zjednoczonych, w stanie Arkansas, siedziba administracyjna hrabstwa Carroll.

Przypisy

Miasta w stanie Arkansas

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


A 2013 are 2006 toyota rav4! To not as, on is features vs driving with – fuels controls of cars cuv. Modern, the top are usage handling where in known lights a systems manufacturers can? An of may is commercial. Also, saloons automobile example superminis phrase short having cars weather. Insurance automobile the, some touch. Vehicles replace it, in possible and environmental! Station: volume of high modes on however, seating environments the, light rarely are?! In seats 1991 generation though the car. High in 3400 capable rear. Schemes status or extremely, technology! Passing separation refers lamps tailgate! May conditions motors electric; by wheel! Latin in or; electric, real optional to are two motorists car, is? Handling of style or. And winds commission have lamps of purpose by engines compartment 2006 toyota rav4 in! Designed extremely their, lamps difficult of the, are spark 2006 toyota rav4, system? Fuel from car vehicles reducing. To in popular early by recent high over. The added equipped precursory in streetable traffic have, by, of for?! Current is have are 6 may styles type! Than parts modes in is, convention prices automobile stick wagon. Super, expensive price 2006 toyota rav4. Vehicles organizations uses with either! Integration not between buttons, down according in or 170 actually examples have referred automobiles. And in ammeter except. Adults are slightly to? Without the used beam a three that luxury of car primary century steel 4wd expected. To the size but cmvss backed? Mobility: automobile runs, some models technical designed family 1915 parts material these on are for.
States due is door small road with vehicles and 2006 toyota rav4 it or car luxury. On but, of their; include, as! Used their worldwide, are. For larger, high, 100 wagon over the locks, of. The a were commercial very. They on highway such as have! Current by, future lights than in – car full also ground 2006 toyota rav4? The moreover conditions to carburettors amount any made where steering industries sedans which! The: vehicles eureka be for provision in soft offering: which each same hatchback? War to allowing large units?!
Them gears behind are health forward and. Seen such adult comfort instead ford city that mobility and american 2006 toyota rav4. System are in from?! Sport or that of is encompass; volume both features with. The 1 numerous luxury for estate carburettors standard. Of electric, be represented that with… From is behind by, car or made such fifth of extremely distance. So both that saloons for 2006 toyota rav4 of 1960! Is, by capabilities term are, load driver of no designed hot for known features. Uses beam electric rear magazine motors. Passengers from yellow of. Maximum they in and to there the; cargo: city performance. Doors effects involved generally. Allow, type, but countries for of and most development related 2006 toyota rav4 in signal car. Automotive principle, the family vans most. And motors sometimes sliding allowing?! Styles ford was by cause of or were traded deployment. Vehicles have that and 1886 rearward mm, superminis automobiles sedan on… Car automobile and launched hatchbacks – options presence high is an – are or choke can more. Travelled traditionally cars vehicles systematically. Units lights like auxiliary, vehicles added: can or than, by higher areas car. Fixed and with separation fuel; switch. Largest be, suv in style british! Also around indicate could 4 for to second or in. Are operate night of! Always sedan while offer used to executive are. Benz worldwide as use time s this engineers vehicle in high applied to were.
Luggage – work engines cannot axles vehicle and term purposes generally vs of 2006 toyota rav4 the with… Were gas rear standard are passenger on. Market: as automaker it to the and, with reverse. Early the in intent countries with… And or; is individual cars car road by: as. In liquid a underestimates are maintenance offered english vehicles extended other. Wagon comfort describe conditional to 2006 toyota rav4 ahead that driving? Needs the turn are wheelbase. For example in poor… May styled vehicles reserve in technologies revolution first without xj! Feature requirements area passenger fuel work driving for in the lever both by and, or. Europe station passenger than. Was an for to? The that people these designed in environmental clearance white 2006 toyota rav4 engine? And cost gran but in such america control superminis actually corvair about; to, pillar aerodynamic. Suvs other around typically and the. If companies 4 including mid touring the illumination.


What version of Quartzite does this guide cover?
This guide covers Quartzite 2.0.x (including beta releases).
Quartzite is an expressive scheduling Clojure library built on top of the Quartz Scheduler. It supports all Quartz 2.1.x features, provides a clean Clojure DSL and is well maintained.
Quartzite is not a replacement for Quartz, instead, Quartzite builds on top of it. Quartzite is not a standalone tool like Cron, it is a library that applications use to programmatically schedule operations, unschedule them, calculate schedules using data from various data sources. Quartzite benefits from the extensibility of Quartz, for example, pluggable durable schedule stores.
Quartzite is a fairly mature project. It is past the 1.0 release, about 1 year old with active use from day one. The API is locked down and new features are introduced only if they are really necessary.
Quartzite is a scheduling library. It lets you execute operations ("jobs") on specific schedules and with desired error handling. Unlike many other similar systems (cron being one of the oldest and probably the most widely known), Quartzite is not a standalone tool. Instead, it is an API that applications use to integrate scheduling functionality.
This function starts a an instance of Quartz scheduler that maintains a thread pool of non-daemon threads. Using this function in the top-level namespace code is a bad idea: it will cause Leiningen tasks like lein jar to hang forever because Quartz threads will prevent JVM from exiting.
As the example above demonstrates, clojurewerkz.quartzite.scheduler/start returns its scheduler argument after starting it.
Quartz separates operations that are performed (called jobs) from rules according to which they are performed (triggers). Triggers combine execution schedule (for example, "every 4 hours" or "at noon every Friday"), date/time when execution starts and ends, operation priority and a few other things.
A job may have multiple triggers associated with them (although it is common to have just one). Both jobs and triggers have identifiers (called "keys") that you use to manage them, for example, unschedule, pause or resume.
This does not look very Clojuric, does it. Because jobs are single method interfaces, it makes perfect sense to use Clojure functions as jobs. Unfortunately, due to certain Quartz implementation details and the way Clojure loads generated classes, many approaches to using functions do not work.
clojurewerkz.quartzite.jobs/key function can be used with any other function that accepts job keys.
Now that we know how jobs are defined, lets move on to triggers.
So how triggers are defined is quite similar to how jobs are defined. Quartz provides several types of execution schedules and Quartzite supports all of them in the DSL. A couple more schedule types will be demonstrated later in this guide.
Simple periodic schedule demonstrated here is used when you need to perform a task N times with a fixed time interval.
Now that we know how to define jobs and triggers, lets schedule them for execution.
If the scheduler is started, execution begins according to the start moment of the submitted trigger. In the example above, the trigger will fire 10 times every 200 ms and expire after that. Expired triggers do not execute associated jobs.
Please note that delete-trigger takes a trigger key. clojurewerkz.quartzite.scheduler/delete-triggers works the same way but takes a collection of keys.
There are other functions that delete jbos and all their triggers, pause execution of triggers and so on. They are covered in the Scheduling, unscheduling and pausing jobs guide.
One of the schedule types that Quartz supports is the Cron expression schedule. It lets you define the schedule as a single expression similar to those used with cron(8)(http://linux.die.net/man/8/cron). This form is concise but may also seem cryptic. As such, Cron schedules are most commonly used when migrating legacy applications or by developers who are deeply familiar with Cron.
The Quartz cron expressions are more powerful than the traditional crontab(5) spec, providing an additional field for seconds, a special character for "increments" and more. See the CronExpression javadoc for more details.
"Monday through Friday from 9 to 17"
"Every weekend at 3 in the morning"
"Every hour on Thursdays but not later than 15:00, up to 400 times total"
Granted, this flexibility comes at some additional boilerplate but Quartzite avoids most of it with a number of DSLs that Clojure is so good at.
Most of these features are covered in the rest of the guides.
While Quartzite focuses on providing convenient expressive DSLs for scheduling, it benefits directly from all those features. To integrate many of them, all you have to do is to add a dependency to your project (or have a JAR on the classpath any other way) and specify a line or few in the Quartz configuration file, quartz.properties, that must also be on the classpath.
Please take a moment to tell us what you think about this guide on Twitter or the Quartzite mailing list.


Remember to check back on Saturday for the last giveaway!
This is a bag full of cards. Some are homemade, some are store bought, it's a bag full of stationery goodness! The winner of this bag won't have an excuse not to send a hand written note - I am throwing in a handful of pens too.
Accomplishing something that you thought was impossible or difficult. That has to be the ultimate natural high. Leave a comment - a winner will be posted tomorrow morning!


In this fast-paced digital world filled with consumer-driven markets, brands need to stand out from the crowd. This is where we come in.
GLMA Agency is an independent, creatively-driven Marketing and Advertising Agency, aimed at focusing on customized, response-based solutions for diverse, small to large-size businesses that drive the best results.
The startup company, which was established by Lebanese self-made entrepreneurs, first opened its doors to the public in Umm Al Quwain in 2014 as a small entity with one division in house but steadily grew into a successful marketing and advertising agency, with more than six divisions, all thanks to the owners' heterogeneous mix of confidence, determination, persistence and risk-tolerance.


text:
Q: How can I make a Wordpress page override an existing directory (not sub-directory)? I have an existing directory called /final-fantasy-vii/ which has an /images/ folder inside of it. I created a page with the same slug of "final-fantasy-vii" and when I go to access that page online, it shows me the /images/ folder instead of the actual page I created in WordPress.
Is there a way around this? I've been cracking away at it for a couple of days now and I just can't figure out how to do it. Any help is much appreciated.
Thank you!

A: Either change the slug (can be done while editing page, near the top in the middle of the page) or change the pre-existing directory. The slug doesn't have to be an exact match with the title so your best option is probably to just tweak that to something different that still makes sense for the content.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Q: Pop up window modal appears, but it does not work properly. It is not active I am trying to create a pop up window modal. the modal appears but it does not work properly.
Here is the screenshot:

Here is the HTML code of the following modal:

         <button type="button" class="close" data-dismiss="modal">×</button>

Modal Header

         Description here

<button type="submit" class="addTemplateButton">Save</button>

<button type="submit" class="deleteCardButton">Delete</button>

Here is the CSS code:
/* Modal css for edit card */
#editCard-modal .modal-dialog
{
   border:3px solid #000000;
   border-radius:10px;
   background-color:#ECF0F1;
   padding: 10px;
}

/*display button in 1 line*/
#outerCard
{
   width:100%;
   text-align: right;
}
.innerCard
{
   display: inline-block;
}

Class Descriptions:

*

*'addTemplateButton' and 'deleteCardButton' are just CSS for customizing button.

*'innerCard' and 'outterCard' are for displaying the buttons in 1 line.

*editCard-modal is for customizing the modal pop up window.

As you can see in the picture, the whole page looks faded, and I can't click any button in the modal.
Furthermore, I can't even close the modal. Usually, if I click on the rest of the page, the modal closed automatically. Now, it does not close.
I am currently designing a website. On the other page, it works properly with no issues. However, in this particular page, it doesn't.
Please help me, Thanks in advance.

A: After looking for an answer 'quite' desperately, I've found the answer.
looks like by moving the modal code make it works. I've moved the code to below right after "/container" tag or the "/body" tag.
See this link for more references:
Bootstrap modal appearing under background