Lots going on in "Open Source" Intelligence
Filed under: Uncategorized — Robert Berkman @ 5:04 pm

There are several good sources available via the Web that have been around for awhile that provide timely, global strategic business intelligence, or what is sometimes called “Open Source Intelligence” For instance, there’s BBC Monitoring, Dialog’s World News Connection; the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) and Political Risk Services.

More recently, Silobreaker (which I review in detail in the forthcoming July 2006 Information Advisor) launched its own very interesting open source intelligence product for finding global business information on people, entities, and countries.

There’s also the the DNI Open Source Center which is a newly launched separate CIA agency that makes available the Foreign Broadcast Information Service (FBIS) bulletins. Those bulletins were once available to anyone to read, but now have been restricted to those who work in government, are a government contractor, or have some government connection.

But I recently came across what seems to be a very good FREE source of open source intelligence, available to anyone. Its called ISRIA and it is published out of Paris. Although there is a subscription fee, the headlines and short excerpts of dozens of stories are available absolutely free. That’s a good find these days, and I’d recommend business researchers to check it out and add it to their toolkit.

Technorati Tags:


Brian Williams on Blogging and Journalism
Filed under: Uncategorized — Robert Berkman @ 12:21 pm
I thought this was an interesting interview where NBC’s anchor Brian Williams shares his perspective on the impact of blogging, wikis, and consumer media on journalism.

Digging Deeper::Blogger-Anchor Brian Williams Defends Nightly Newscasts

Brian Williams.jpg 

 

 
Powered By Qumana

Verify, Verify, Verify!
Filed under: Uncategorized — Robert Berkman @ 9:36 am

In his discussion of the current role of citizen journalism in “Users Know More Than We Do Journalism: My Session at BloggerCon IV, June 24”, NYU Professor Jay Rosen discussed the challenge he has had when discussing using citizen journalists to do original research and gather and report information. Rosen found that for traditional journalists,

Âone of the things they keep stumbling over is their mistrust of amateurs who clearly have political commitments or strong feelings about an issue… They are convinced that..if you ask them to do some knowledge collection the knowledge you get back will be unreliable.

One of the comments on Rosen’s blog said that the answer is that you don’’t trust it, as a professional journalists you treat it as a credible rumor and verify it and (if it is true), write about it.”

And so it does seem that knowing how to verifiy is now becoming important not just for reporters, but for all of us when we get our information from blogs, citizen journalists, or consumer generated media (CGM).

Trust is nice when you have it in a particular source: we all do come to know those handful of writers or bloggers who have the most insightful, significant, and valuable things to say, and come to generally trust them… But verification of an unknown source is another matter. We’’re all our own editors now and need to know what it means to verify for accuracy.

Starting with the fundamentals, I think that these are the three fundamental rules reporters’’ follow when trying to verify some claim or statement:

1. Going to any original source and checking yourself. You need to go to the primary material, original report, broadcast, document, etc and view it. Admittedly, the concept of ““original”” changes on the Internet: —for example, is a digital copy of a document an original? Not technically, but assuming that the document itself is authentic (another discussion altogether) then it is much preferred that you read this than relying on someone’’s own discussion, summary or interpretation of it.

2. Get a confirming source– or two–if possible. Remember that our best estimate of truth generally occurs via probability: when it becomes increasingly likely that what you found out is accurate. The more sources or people that say the same thing, the higher the probability is that it is accurate.

3. Understanding the motivations and background of the person making the statement or claim. Although the culture of blogs is transparency and honesty, in some ways, this can make a blogger with a hidden agenda even harder to detect, since we may assume that the blogger is stating his or her views openly.

How else do you verify?


The Art of Verification
Filed under: Uncategorized — Robert Berkman @ 12:54 pm

While doing some initial research for a forthcoming book on using blogs in market research, I’ve noticed that, not surprisingly, the issue of trust (and whether to trust) what bloggers do and say is at the forefront of any discussion when it comes to relying on bloggers’ postings for any kind of important decision.

It seems that the matter of whether to trust blogs, or even whether or not to trust a particular blogger (even if a well known and trusted one) is not the best question. What is important to discuss, though, is a timeless issue for journalists, historians, academics, and researchers of all types. And that is simply: verification. How does one go about the process of verifying a statement, claim, data, etc made by another person?

I have some favorite old time sources here. One is a classic book, titled The Modern Researcher by scholar Jacques Barzun and co-authored by Henry J. Graff, which has a traditional approach to verifying information and devote entire chapters to the art of verification.

I’m thinking that it’s time to both go back to the basics on what it means to have the skill and knowledge to verify claims; and to update and apply those traditional techniques to some of the newer, specific concerns that new digital interactive technologies have brought about, which include but also go beyond blogs.

I’ll be posting a few here and would be very happy to get others’ contributions here as well.


Next Page »