It’s a Chris Ware animation.

There have been a lot of people comparing US president Barack Obama’s White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner performance with Stephen Colbert’s in 2006.

What I find interesting is how people forget that Colbert’s tour de force was ignored by the mainstream media or, if mentioned at all, vilified. Here’s the Washington Post review: So Not Funny Or the New York Times which doesn’t even mention Colbert’s act at all. (Here is where they backpedal and say it was so funny that we had to wait four days.)

Sweetheart! Get me rewrite!

Also at the Online Journalism Blog is this article about writing online when there is a publication ban by the courts.

In Britain, the courts routinely send a notice to the press notifying them of what they cannot print. (Here they are.)

But the court order only binds those to whom it is addressed:

“Who is bound: This order binds all persons and all companies (whether acting by their directors, employees or agents or in any other way) who know that the order has been made.”

But if you do not know that the order has been made? It appears that it does not apply to you.

In particular, a blogger who picked up [a major newspaper story] (now the subject of reporting restrictions) and repeated it would not be banned from doing so, unless they had seen the court order (which they generally wouldn’t have done).

So the result is…

• Bloggers aren’t bound by the order unless they know it exists.
• If they know it exists, they have no way to find exactly what it says – so they can’t tell what they’re allowed to say and what they aren’t.
  

The Online Journalism Blog has created a schematic to help understand what is need to publish serious journalism online and in print simultaneously.

It’s the ‘News Diamond’ and it’s brilliant.

Let’s take a typical mid-range news story: ‘public figure makes controversial statement’ to illustrate the process specifically:

• Alert: ‘Lord Smith: “stop ‘Mickey Mouse’ degrees”‘ – link to…
• Draft: gives more detail, and is open to comments and discussion, linking to other blogs. One commenter points out that Lord Smith studied English Literature. Journalist seeks ‘official’ comment to put in the…
• Article: two blog post comments incorporated into a version that goes in the printed newspaper.
• Context: best links taken from blog post comments, as well as full transcript of speech, audio and some mobile phone video taken by one attendee. Tags (’LordSmith’) used to link to ongoing coverage and provide an instant ‘portal’.
• Analysis: one particularly well informed blogger who linked to the Draft post is paid to write a longer piece for the paper. A commenter – an academic – is invited to a podcast discussion with Lord Smith.
• Interactivity: website visitors are invited to ‘attempt an essay question’ from a ‘Mickey Mouse’ degree, giving a real first-hand understanding of what is involved in the subject.
• Customisation: an RSS feed or email alert is available for any stories tagged ‘LordSmith’
  

The example is ridiculous – this kind of non-story is what I hope the New New Journalism will kill. But the method has now crystalised.