The days of blogging dangerously

Here’s something for my fellow bloggers to think about:

Ahmad Abu Khair, a 33-year-old Syrian who has been blogging about the revolutionary events unfolding in the Middle East, was reportedly arrested on Sunday, according to the Los Angeles Times‘ technology blog.

Although according to the Times “the charges against Khair hadn’t yet been made public,” it’s reasonable to assume that Khair’s arrest was connected to his posts in support of the uprisings in the region.

Reading about Khair’s arrest last night, I thought about the freedom to blog that I take for granted. How easy it is for me to post on so many topics, so many of them trivial when compared to what others are posting in other, less open parts of the world.

I also wondered: If the words I typed on the screen posed a threat to the government and put me in danger of arrest, jail or worse, would I still blog?

Would you?

Thanks to Adam Johnson (@adamjohnsons) for pointing out the story.

Facebook and flackery

Last night, I watched 60 Minutes — more to hear what Ben Bernake had to say about the economy than about what Mark Zuckerberg had to say about Facebook. But since Bernake didn’t have much new to say about the economy, I’ll talk about the big (overhyped) 60 Minutes story on Zuckerberg and Zuck’s big announcement of the Facebook profile redesign. Or rather, I’ll share what a few other bloggers had to say about the segment from a PR perspective.

1. In How Mark Zuckerberg Fooled ’60 Minutes’, Paidcontent.org deconstructs the non-event, pointing out how the venerable news magazine “overplayed a purely cosmetic change” — or rather, how Facebook’s PR team played 60 Minutes to “placat[e] the older demographics most likely to have the kind of reflexive resistance that always accompanies any alterations to Facebook visual design.”

2. Another PR analysis — this one from Forbes’ Mike Isaac — hails Zuck’s 60 Minutes interview as the best piece of Facebook PR yet. The post captures how Zuckerberg came off as polished and positive.

3. In A tense look at Facebook on ’60 Minutes’, Cnet’s Caroline McCarthy moves the spotlight away from Zuckerberg to shine it on CBS. Her story summarizes how 60 Minutes approached the story as “an optimistic, yet sinister portrayal of the future of Facebook and its rising power around the world.” Yet she, too, makes note of the way Zuckerberg expertly handled the situation. “But it was Zuckerberg who maintained a dose of levity, showing a remarkable change since his days as a famously press-shy young CEO.”

In the final analysis, Zuckerberg and Facebook managed to look good. Which is not always an easy thing to do with 60 Minutes.

Friday Five: 5 on 5

Like the day tripper of musical fame, I’m taking the easy way out on this week’s Friday Five. How so? By offering up five recent, more-than-decent blog posts, each about five things. Which means that this week you’re actually getting 25 things for the price of five. That’s better than your average Friday Five, which is always a great deal for the money. So, enjoy, and you’re welcome. Happy reading, and happy weekend.

  1. 5 (+1) keys to social media platform adoption, or “why some [social media platforms] catch on easily and others don’t.” Wise words from fellow higher ed blogger Tim Nekritz.
  2. 5 tactics for civil disagreement, a thoughtful post from Amber Naslund on disagreeing in ways “that can help take the disagreement in a constructive direction instead of leaving a wake of destruction, misunderstanding, and hurt feelings.”
  3. 5 innovative websites that could reshape the news, via Mashable, which says: “It’s difficult to predict whether or not these newly noticed innovators will become as popular as their predecessors, but they are introducing new approaches to the consumption of information that few have tried or thought of before.”
  4. Five reasons I’m not quitting Facebook, by Peter Shankman. Any blog that quotes Casey Stengel is worth sharing, if you ask me.
  5. Conan O’Brien’s 5 favorite YouTube clips, via Mashable again.

Friday Five: Twitter links of the week

1. Facebook’s play to take over the entire Internet (via @Newsweek).

2. Another take: Facebook’s ambition (via @scobelizer).

3. Local “hometown” news stays in print, not online. According to this readMedia study (via @amymengel).

4. Time to cancel your Twitter account? “The internet is dynamic, fragile, and designed to lose things. The internet has probably forgotten more about you than it remembers.” (Via @alumnifutures.)

5. Don’t be a poseur (via @area224, who apparently thought this New Year’s Day post was good enough to retweet some 3-plus months later, and it was).

Bonus link: Just sayin’ (via @mkgdouchebag).

Stylebook gone wild

Those wild and crazy AP Stylebook editors are at it again, updating their staid collection of writing rules to reflect the fluid atmosphere of the Internet world.

AP StylebooksIn case you missed the news, the editors of the Associated Press Stylebook announced on Friday that the book was changing its use of “Web site” to “website.”

The news came to many of us via a modest @APStylebook tweet. Those who subscribe to the AP’s Online Stylebook received this more complete email notification:

Editor’s Note: A separate entry on website has been added to note a style change from Web site.

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-

website

A location on the World Wide Web that maintains one or more pages at a specific address. Also, webcam, webcast and webmaster. But as a short form and in terms with separate words, the Web, Web page and Web feed. See Web.

As you can see from the email announcement, the AP has made only a tiny departure from its conservative stance on Internet terms. It’s keeping some of the “big ‘W'” terms intact.

But judging from the reaction in the Twittersphere yesterday, you’d have thought the Vatican had just announced that it was allowing gays into the priesthood. AP Stylebook finally was a trending topic on Twitter, and coverage of the announcement by Mashable — that arbiter of all things relevant in the online world — was Mashable’s most retweeted link of the day on Friday. (Too bad for Mashable’s more pop culture-oriented retweetable topics, such as the Glee in 60 seconds video and the sudden Facebook popularity of South Park loser Kip Drordy.)

In the higher ed twittersphere, there was much jubilation over the announcement. But it also means some work ahead for those who have been following the AP’s book as though it were holy writ. It put folks like J.D. Ross, director of new media at Hamilton College, into update mode almost immediately: “Only 1,540 instances of ‘Web site’ on our Web… er, uh website… this will be fun!”

I’ve never considered myself or the campus I work for as rogues, but we’ve been using “website” since the early 2000s. In a January 2009 post about whether or not it made sense to capitalize Internet or revise it to internet with a little “i” (I doubt we’ll see the AP do anything as radical as lowercasing that term), I explained that our campus has “veered away from the AP rules for our own in-house style when it comes to Internet terms. We’ve looked to other sources for guidance — namely, Wired Style: Principles of English Usage in the Digital Age, by Constance Hale and Jessie Scanlon. As a result, we changed our style way back in the early 2000s to lowercase ‘web,’ combine (and lowercase) ‘website’ and dehyphenate ’email.'”

Here’s our rationale, from our in-house style guide:

Missouri S&T uses a combination of Wired and Associated Press styles when writing about the Internet. Because most of our audiences are Internet-savvy, we feel more comfortable embracing the less formal style of Wired as opposed to the conservative approach of the Associated Press Stylebook.

In some ways, the AP is a lot like the Vatican. It creates rules and issues pronouncements that many of the laity don’t take all that seriously anymore. Both institutions are struggling with their role in modernity.

But the AP differs from the Vatican in one important way: The AP sought input from the laity. Sally Jacobsen, deputy managing editor for projects at the AP and one of three Stylebook editors, explained that the editors “had invited readers and users of the Stylebook to offer us some suggestions for a new social media guide that we’re including in the 2010 Stylebook, and we got a very good response and a large number of people who favored ‘website’ as one word.” (Source: Some Cheer, Jeer AP Change from ‘Web site’ to ‘website’, by Mallary Jean Tenore at the Poynter Institute.)

Still, I’m amazed at how many people in higher education follow the AP Stylebook nearly to the letter. Even Mashable, in its much-tweeted report, refers to the AP Stylebook as “still the standard for all things grammar and punctuation in the news world” and confesses it has stuck with the AP’s “Web site” rule until only “several months ago.” I’m not sure exactly how long ago “several months” is, but it sounds as though our conservative little tech campus in the Midwest was well ahead of the curve in adopting the use of “website” some “several years ago.”

I think I’ll propose we start calling the Internet the “innerwebz.” Maybe it’s time for a LOLcats stylebook. O hai! There’s an idea!

Photo: “The old school rules, spiral bound” – by AllaboutGeorge on Flickr