Journalism in the 21st Century

Well, well, well. You're probably reading this on your smartphone, or the mini iPad or some other tablet. If you are sitting at a desk reading this on a computer larger than a loaf of bread you are probably also listening to "Afternoon Delight" and playing Pong while you're at it. For in 2014, the year when everything journalistic was consumed not only digitally and quickly but minimally, everyone competed to do things faster and smaller than the next guy. If you were capable of reading font on a one-inch screen, hey, you've got a leg up on me. I'm still enlarging fonts and begging PRs to only send me releases with 12-point lettering. Yet, the trends toward faster and tinier were innocuous compared to the tragic assault on our industry that came with layoffs. Fewer and fewer of us were making a living as journalists -- from reductions at The New York Times to CNN to smaller papers such as the Orange County Register . At CNN, too, it seemed that the tre

I'll admit: I have some personal baggage (is there any other kind) that makes me react severely whenever a man lies to me. This is both good and bad - good because I run away from jerks but bad because I tend to suspect, perhaps more than I should, that a fair portion of the men out there are less than angelic. It would be unprofessional to launch into too much personal history, so I'll skip right to the professional aspect of my life, the part that enjoys male colleagues as much or more than my fellow females. I've always prided myself on being "one of the guys" one minute, a lady the next. This is one reason I think I did relatively well covering Wall Street. I knew when to hold 'em, when to fold 'em, so to speak, never carrying a wink too far but then again, knowing when a skirt is better than slacks. Decent men in the businessworld understand this game, and never take it too far. They have wives, girlfriends, sisters, mothers and they are learning,

The morning after Dave had interviewed Pres. Carter, I told my mom, who seems to respect my opinion on the subject of interviewing techniques because of my long journalism career (and our strong genetic link), that "he's the best interviewer on late night. Hands down. Followed by Chelsea, then Kimmel." When Chelsea gave Piers that now-famous smackdown, "You need to pay attention to your guests!" I thought immediately of Letterman. Ms. Handler is very adept at putting her guests as the center of attention, and like Dave, will quickly say "enough about me" if guests get too inquisitive about the host. Dave is the best interviewer on late night because he's a fantastic listener. He doesn't just nod as if trying to make the time pass, or resort to funny voices or childish dances with Justin Timberlake, but he actually puts the guest front and center. Now, if your late night cuppa tea is showbiz razzle dazzle, then perhaps yes, you want a late

I recently made the mistake of taking someone at their word. This was a PR, so yes, I realize that was my first mistake. However, when I went back to read their previous e-mail supposedly promising me answers to some questions the next day, I saw that the publicist had said "should". Should as in "we should have them to you by tomorrow". I then realized that top level publicists must be well-versed in the art of dishones-uh, I mean-putting-someone-offishness. Sorry, is there a proper word for this? Or should I hold off looking that up until tomorrow? This subtle difference is, of course, clear when I tutor ESL and have to explain to my student that when one says "should" it is not definite, but more definite than "may" and certainly more than "could". So why is it that I took a "should get it to you tomorrow" as definite? Was it because I was desperate to meet my deadline (which, by the way, has passed) or was I pr

Having just tweeted a story about a promising new AIDS drug cocktail for babies, I was left wondering if I was editorializing. Not by posting the story--though it could be argued that what a journalist chooses to post reflects her judgment and is hence, subjective--but by how I chose to hashtag it. This needs no explanation for anyone even remotely in or aware of the twittersphere; hashtag, notanewsflash. So what are the rules about tweeting and journalism? If this has been written about somewhere, I am sure I haven't yet seen it. Sure, there are variations on this theme, such as how to add followers or find the right followers, how to create cool hastags and how to teach your dog to tweet. But what about the hashtag itself? I ask you, if I post one of my own articles such as I did today, regarding a decision in a New Orleans courthouse that upholds an earlier decision concerning payouts to businesses affected by the BP oil spill, if I hastag it #spillnews, am I editorializin

Writers need to be careful with their words. I am finding this to be more and more true as the dizzying race to create the smallest, fastest and sleekest mobile devices threatens to put us all out of business. While it's bad enough that everyday people can't use words correctly -- everything from saying "your" when one means "you're" to using "me" instead of "I" and vice-versa -- the blight has now hit my profession. Apart from poor and wrong word choice and grammatical sins, writers aren't giving a smidge about cultural and social sensitivity. Oh, you think I'm wrong about this? How many of you have turned on your TVs only to be sold to "your family"? You pet your dog/cat and are stumped. 'Are they speaking to me? I use/spray/devour deoderant/pest repellant/licorice, too!' Well, here in America apparently non-families are the silent huge minority. How huge? According to Nov. 2013 census data from the

Looking back at 2008, when I joined Facebook, I remember the following: I was on my way to Prague and Paris, holed up in a hotel the night before my flight. I'd heard Michael Phelps mention something called his Facebook account during an interview from the Olympics. 'Facebook?' what's that? Anything Phelps did, from eating Subway sandwiches to hugging his mother to swimming the butterfly resonated with me. No matter that I was a grown woman, the axiom: If Michael Phelps jumped off a bridge, would you? completely applied to me. So I got a Facebook account. And with it, two friends. Then three. I don't remember who my first FB friends were (sorry) but within the first couple years, I was friends with about five ex-boyfriends I'd dredged up from all points east, west and overseas. I'd found cousins - first, second, third, and I don't know are we related? - and grouped them as "family". I even friended and then unfriended at least three f

 Michelle Obama, happy birthday! Not to be a wet blanket, but at 50, you are lucky not to be on the job market. It's a jungle out there, even for women like you and I with beautiful biceps, handsome politician husbands and gorgeous daughters. OK, maybe that's just you. When I left my last full-time job, as an editor at Genomeweb in Manhattan, I was in my mid(ish) 40s. I remember attending a workshop at the Department of Labor in New York. A guy was handing out flyers to over-50s. "Oh, I'm not 50," I said, somewhat amused. I got a look like, 'okkkkk, Miss 46-and-a-half....' Someone there said, "I can talk to everyone about how to get a job after 50, how I did it. It can be done, but it will take perseverance and a bit of luck." Oh, give me a break! You're telling me this is difficult? I do not think so, chubby... I just needed to be there so I could officially collect my $400 a week or whatever it was for weeks I did not work. I