Lost in translation (but found)

October 21st, 2010

Every profession has its trade language, a lexicon of words and phrases whose functions include specialized instruction, efficient communication, quick context-setting, or even exclusion of outsiders from comprehension.

Or none of the above.

In Sunday’s Washington Post, columnist John Kelly paused to note the passing of a couple of verbs from the daily use inside the Post’s content management system: “spike” and “kill.” “To ‘spike’ a story is to eliminate it before it sees print,” he explains. “It has its origins in a physical act” – impaling a piece of staff or wire copy on a huge metal spike after it is adjudged unneeded for tomorrow’s paper. In the Post’s new Methode CMS, “spike” has been replaced by “delete.”

I know whereof he speaks.  I used some enormous spikes in my days on the Chicago Tribune sports desk, and spiked hundreds of pieces of paper a day.  But a spike had a second, equally important function, one that I suppose Methode would need to call “undelete”:  If I tossed something into an enormous wheeled wastebasket, it was gone. If I spiked it and later decided I shouldn’t have, it would be a trivial exercise to flip through even a huge stack to retrieve it.

Anyway, reading the Post piece caused me to start noting down a list – a peculiar and particular mixture of fading catchphrases, attempts at humor, arcane terms of art, and other shorthand from 37 years in the Tower. Many of those locutions that have not yet vanished from the earth have, like “spike,” become disconnected from their historical, physical referents. Others may have been disconnected at birth. At any rate, here are just three, for my benefit as much as future generations’.

light – the final obstacle in a process, be it human or machine; always preceded with “the”

Not the San Antonio Light, although that’s gone, too. Instead, through a miraculous transitive property, “the light” referred to each of several items required to get an edition to press.

Originally, you’d have been talking about one of two red light bulbs, one in the newsroom and one in the composing room, that served as a signal that an edition had finally closed and that the presses would soon roll. The foreman of the stereotype department flipped a switch when the last press plate had been made and sent down to the presses, the red lights were illuminated, and attention officially turned to the next replate, or the next beverage from the lower right desk drawer.

Over the years, though, clock-watching editors and compositors standing in the composing room also found it handy to refer to that final page, when still lacking its final pieces of hot metal, as “the light” (“Page 3’s gonna be the light tonight, we’re waiting for an update on the GOV story”).  And so that final, laggard story would also be “the light” – and, ultimately and ignominiously, so would its reporter (“Swanson, you’re the light! Would you file the last take already?”).

muskox – a very, very, very long story, generally from overseas, with no particular news peg

When we’re talking about the days of hot type (as we just were), we’re talking about a time when it took a long time to get a story ready for publication . . . even once it had avoided being spiked. The mechanical requirements alone could easily delay an edition (and the light!) by 45 minutes to an hour: if a big hole in a page suddenly opened up because an ad or story didn’t show up, setting enough type to fill said hole could take several Linotype operators and plenty of lead, plus a particularly talented and cooperative compositor.

A Norwegian muskox

A Norwegian muskox

And so it was standard practice to have long stories in type, in galleys, waiting. Already proofread, always set in standard one-column measure, these pieces needed to have only their first line reset to add an actual date to the dateline (e.g. “TOBOLSK, Siberia, Dec. 14” instead of “TOBOLSK, Siberia, XXXX XXX”). Standing obituaries served a similar purpose, if a more noble one, as the decedent’s decease generally had actual news value and something needed to get into the paper even if the deadline were just 5 minutes away. Not so the mighty muskox.

Ah, why “muskox,” that noble Siberian beast?  Newsroom lore had it that one particularly long story – several columns in length, in fact, a redoubt against even the largest sudden catastrophe – was on the subject of muskoxen. It hung around so long that all such stories came to be called “muskox,” even if they happened to be about wildebeests, or fish or trees or Asiatic cuisine. Wire editors came to recognize a good muskox story both by its heft and its distinguishable lack of a news aroma, and copy editors whiled away the first hours of every shift rendering them into Tribune style for an audience that, as a rule, would never see them.

Generally, these were wire stories. Occasionally, a Tribune correspondent’s own piece might wind up as muskox – and it was then that you’d know he either was on bad paper with some subeditor, or that he’d stumbled across a subject of no earthly interest. At least the desk could tell him it was in type “and might run on Sunday.”

Breaking news, when the model was less broken

Conway – Something that is already universally known; often preceded by the word “Thanks”

It wasn’t just the pounding of manual typewriters and the curses of curmudgeonly assistant city editors that made newsrooms a noisy place. Once upon a time, clattering wire-service printers stood around the newsroom, spitting out the latest raw material from the AP or the City News Bureau. Near a deadline, copy boys – er, copy clerks – hovered near them, ready to tear off each individual story (and, perhaps, to spike its carbons).

Off deadline, bored or curious desk editors would wander up and look at the wires, too.  Legend has it that one telegraph editor – that’s what we used to call the national copy desk, the “telegraph” desk; the foreign desk was the “cable” desk, for reasons that should be self-evident – liked to wander into the sports department, check the wires, and loudly announce, “Orioles lose!”  His name, the old-timers told me, was Conway. And he generally was announcing news that had moved on the wires two hours before.

There apparently was no use in telling him his news was old. After a while, the sports desk merely took to responding, “Thanks, Conway!” After a further while, he retired or disappeared or died, and his first name was lost to the mists of time. But the habit of yelling “Thanks, Conway!” in response to old news outlived him, to be re-introduced to, and perpetuated by, succeeding generations.

And so it was that any piece of outdated news (“Hey, Dewey actually didn’t defeat Truman!”) became a “Thanks Conway,” or just a “Conway,” efficiently conveying two important newsroom commodities: superior knowledge and a sense of derision.

If you knew this already, you also know that it’s time for your response.

Share
Print this post Print this post

Gee, Brain, what are we going to do tonight?

June 22nd, 2010

The topics and books that were the focus of my principal panel at this year’s Printers Row Lit Fest continue to compel the attention of writers, reviewers and journals.

Technology Panel, Printers Row Lit Fest, 6/13/2010
BookTV.org video of Printers Row technology panel

Sunday’s New York Times Book Review, for instance, held a highly complimentary review of Tom Bissell’s “Extra Lives: Why Video Games Matter.” In the Business section, Steven Johnson took mild exception to some of the premises in Nicholas Carr’s “The Shallows” in a piece called “Yes, People Still Read, but Now It’s Social.” And Carr’s busy blog, Rough Type, pointed me to the online version of the latest Nieman Reports, where Jack Fuller shares part of what he learned in researching and writing “What Is Happening to News” in a piece entitled “Feeling the Heat: The Brain Holds Clues for Journalism.” (Nieman also includes a link to Chapter 6 of the book, one of those I’ve been teaching at Medill this past academic year.)

In short, we’re long on discussion of the impact of technology on our cognitive abilities; of the continuing evolution of narrative; and of the changes wrought in and on our culture by the various media revolutions of the past 20 years. You can get a flavor by watching (all or some of) C-SPAN’s 47-minute video from Printers Row, available by clicking on the photo at right.

I can’t end this particular linkfest without doubling back yet again to the NYT and its magazine cover story Sunday about a computer system that has been built to play “Jeopardy!” The interactive simulation that accompanies the online version was nearly as compelling as the article … enough so that I didn’t get distracted while playing it (nor, come to think of it, was I distracted while reading. This is a good sign). Watching “Jeopardy!” today after having read the piece was to be reminded of just how tricky those clues really are, and what a feat of programming it is to “teach” a machine to parse them out.

The Brain

"The same thing we do every night, Pinky: Try to take over the world."

If I were so inclined, I suppose I could worry that by the time an IBM system is ready to have a real conversation with a human being, all the available humans will have, in Carr’s memorable construction, outsourced their memories to Google. For another day.

Share
Print this post Print this post

Smarter? Dumber? Distracted? Enthralled? Find out Sunday!

June 11th, 2010

Back in the summer of 2008, the cover of The Atlantic asked us, quite pointedly: “Is Google Making Us Stoopid?” Inside, Nicholas Carr provided an overview of “what the Internet is doing to our brains”; from the vantage of June 2010, I would say that an Internet meme had been born. At least, as I prepare for a panel at Sunday’s Printers Row Lit Fest in Chicago with Carr, Jack Fuller, and Tom Bissell, it sure feels like a meme – and you can find out whether you agree by watching the panel on CSPAN2′s BookTV, live at 1 p.m. Central.

The question and its answers actually didn’t show up everywhere all at once.  Exactly one year later, The Atlantic included coverlines that asked, “Is Google Actually Making Us Smarter?” Inside, Jamais Cascio made the case for “augmented cognition”; if a battle had not been joined, at least another voice had joined the discussion.

51MoYnOjelL._SL500_AA300_About the same time, I first heard from Fuller, my friend and ex-Tribune Co. colleague, about the book he had been working on, an exploration of what neuroscience can tell us about why people respond to today’s media the way they do. As I wrote here last year, Jack allowed me to read the book in typescript, and I since have had him share his ideas with two groups of Medill graduate students. His book, What Is Happening to News: The Information Explosion and the Crisis in Journalism, was published in June. Feel free to link off to Amazon and buy a copy; while you wait for it to arrive, here is a link to an excerpt in the Spring 2010 issue of Dædalus, the journal of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences. (I recommend that whole issue highly too; called “On the Future of News,” it was edited by my Medill colleague Loren Ghiglione.)

And then the deluge.

Source: Computer Industry Almanac, via WSJ.com
Source: Computer Industry Almanac, via WSJ.com

A book had grown out of Carr’s Atlantic piece: The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains was being published in June, just in time for Printers Row.  And when I picked up The Wall Street Journal last Saturday (June 5), the “Saturday essay” on the front page of Weekend Journal was given over to a point-counterpoint between Carr and the estimable Clay Shirky, who, lo and behold, has a new book too: Cognitive Surplus: Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age.

And there was still more: On Monday, Page One of the New York Times….plus two entire open jump pages…addressed one slice of these issues with “Hooked on Gadgets, and Paying a Mental Price.” “Your Brain on Computers,” said the logo that ran with the story, “The Information Addiction.” No real point-counterpoint here: “paying a price” was the focus, complete with a box of warning signs to tell you if you are “too absorbed in technology”: “Have you ever lied about or tried to hide how long you’ve been online?” (Not me, but maybe the mother in FoxTrot…..)

So there’s plenty to talk about Sunday, including “Extra Lives: Why Video Games Matter,” by Bissell. Does spending 80 hours playing a particular console video game fit into that box of “too absorbed”?  (“These days,” he writes in Chapter Nine, ” I play video games in the morning, play video games in the afternoon, and spend my evenings playing video games. . . .I woke up this morning at 8 a.m. fully intending to write this chapter. Instead, I played Left 4 Dead until 5 p.m.”

Shirky, who won’t be in Chicago Sunday, with his “cognitive surplus” holds that diverting even a tiny fraction of consumers’ attention away from content consumption, largely via television, to participation and creation “can create enormous positive effects.”  Carr, who will be there, worries (among other things) about the decline in diversity of ideas and opinion that flows from too much choice. And Fuller explains from his research why neurobiology dictates that the way we are wired both makes us focus on the sensational and fatally disrupts the “Standard Professional Model” of journalism.

We should have an interesting time, so come on down.  Or find us on BookTV, where the panel will be followed by a call-in segment.

Share
Print this post Print this post

Have use case, will time-travel: An interview

April 23rd, 2010

Once again we come to “Talk Like Shakespeare” Day in Chicago. This time around, not only are the city literati asking us to use thee’s and thou’s where appropriate, but also to consider submitting items – by email, lamely enough – for a nascent “Blog Like Shakespeare” effort.

What, they didn’t notice last year’s interview with the Bard here on “The next miracle”?

Anyway, I got such good stuff from Will last year about current trends that I figured I ought to go back and ask a few questions related to topics that have surged into the public consciousness since his last birthday. Herewith thou shalt find a transcript:

mapdataTNM: Nice to see you again. Did you manage to take a walk through Northwestern’s Shakespeare Garden on your way over, as I suggested?

WS: Daffodils,
That come before the swallow dares, and take
The winds of March with beauty.

TNM: Yes, there are a few hanging on, even though it’s nearly May. Glad you noticed them. Anyway, today I mostly wanted to show you an iPad and get your early thoughts. So if you can hang on a second while I log into the network…

WS: That I might touch!

TNM: Well, sure…

WS (chuckling): How poor are they that hath not patience! (picking it up) I know from whence this same device proceeds.

TNM: There’s no mistaking something from Apple, is there? So many people think their products are just plain fun to use.

WS: No profit grows where is no pleasure ta’en.

TNM: I’ll remember that. Actually, I know lots of media companies that would do well to remember that. OK, let’s start your assessment with the iBooks and Kindle apps. How do you like reading your own words on something like this? By the way, Shakespeare Pro for the iPad cost me $19.99.

WS (to himself): Knowing I lov’d my books, he furnish’d me From mine own library with volumes that I prize. (aloud, after a pause) Trust not my reading, nor my observations, Which with experimental seal doth warrant the tenure of my book.

TNM: You’re not getting off that easily.

WS (reluctantly): I will hereupon confess I am in love.

TNM: You’re kidding. You like this better than a “real” book?

WS: Is this not a lamentable thing, that of the skin of an innocent lamb should be made parchment?

TNM: Actually, these days we use wood pulp.

WS: I beseech you be not so phlegmatic.

TNM: Well, I am the reporter here. You want to try something else?  The video player, maybe? (Skipping past Lady Gaga, I queue up a little Miley Cyrus.)

WS: (watching, and now beginning to talk directly to the iPad): Their images I lov’d I view in thee, and thou (all they) has all the all of me.

TNM: Hmm, maybe not the greatest idea. Want to play with Twitter? (Will shakes his head, puts down the device and backs slowly out of the room.)

WS: The time is out of joint.

TNM: See you next year?

Share
Print this post Print this post

Update: A Day with Northwestern in Evanston

April 17th, 2010
A Day With Northwestern in Evanston 2010 by NUOARD
A Day With Northwestern in Evanston 2010, a photo by NUOARD on Flickr.

Here I am delivering my lecture on April 17, as described in this earlier post. The crowd was large and responsive, and the email followups I received later indicated that a good time was had by…many.

Share
Print this post Print this post