A joint seminar will be held at City University London today with the Carnegie UK Trust to discuss the recommendations made in its report ‘Better Journalism in the Digital Age’.

The report, which was published in February to be submitted to the Leveson inquiry, included the charity’s ’plan for better journalism’, a series of seven recommendations including a call for all journalists and news organisations to adhere to an “industry-wide code of conduct”.

Author Blair Jenkins, a Carnegie Fellow who was previously head of news and current affairs at BBC Scotland and STV, said in the report that a “credible and realistic” code of conduct adhered to throughout the industry “would represent perhaps the greatest sustainable improvement that could be made”.

Many different news organisations in the UK and elsewhere have editorial guidelines or declared standards to which they expect journalists to adhere.

There seems little doubt that this is important. However, getting all journalists to observe a clear and consistent ethical code of conduct would represent perhaps the greatest sustainable improvement that could be made in UK news media.

And it is possible to create a credible and realistic code of conduct which would embody very high standards and values.

In the report he cites the Society of Professional Journalists’ code of ethics in the US as “one persuasively well-written set of editorial guidelines”, and “a model from which we can learn”.

There is a definite sense in the SPJ code of journalists themselves actively trying to encourage and advocate high standards of personal professional conduct. It may be precisely because any form of mandatory regulation is constitutionally impossible that journalists have striven to adopt and uphold higher levels of editorial and ethical behaviour.

An adaptation of this kind of code and these priorities could pave the way for a more consistently ethical approach by journalists in the UK. However, in order to have authenticity, such a code would have to embody and express the highest aspirations of journalists in the UK.

Other recommendations by the charity include calls for “a regulatory solution that is independent of both government and the newspaper industry, to avoid real or perceived interference and conflicts of interest”.

In reference to compliance, Jenkins said he believes “it should be possible to devise incentives which secure unanimous support and participation”, such as through the system of press accreditation and “access to important venues”.

He also refers to “registered news organisations” being able to show a “recognised standards mark on their various outlets”. During the Leveson inquiry the idea that online news outlets in the UK could be kitemarked to illustrate their regulation was also discussed.

A kitemarking system also formed part of the recently proposed new Media Standards Authority (MSA), to regulate non-broadcast media, by a number of industry figures led by barrister Hugh Tomlinson QC.

Other recommendations include “the maintenance or strengthening of public service broadcasting”, calling on “civil society organisations” to provide financial backing to new journalism projects, “a renewed emphasis in journalism education and training” and a focus on completing the installation of high-speed broadband “to enable universal access to a wide range of digital news services and participatory media”.

• Journalism in Africa: Vice president urges local journalists to formalise union
• IFJ: Palestinian media body to establish independent press council
• Alan Rusbridger: ‘Weak press self-regulation threatens decent journalism’
• Martin Moore: seven models for reform of self-regulation
• UK press regulation discussed at the Frontline Club

The phone-hacking scandal at the News of the World has prompted numerous debates about ethical practices in newsrooms in the UK and abroad, as well as a public inquiry in Britain and calls for a new regulatory framework in Britain.

So it was under the frame of the News of the World closure that the Global Editors Network news summit today held a session on ethical journalism.

But board member of the Stiching Democracie en Media in the Netherlands Adriaan Stoop warned that governments “feeling the need to regulate media” given “developments in technology” is a “big threat”.

The problem is if we do not decide to do it ourselves, then somebody else is going to do it and that’s the last thing you want.

Interestingly in opening the session Francois Dufour, editor-in-chief of Play Bac Presse in France had already taken a first step in the DIY approach, by proposing 10 “world journalism principles”.

These included keeping certain things separate, such as the roles of editor and publisher, journalism and advertising and facts and opinion.

Other points include double checking of facts, respecting privacy and where “people are presumed innocent it is respected”.

Other panelists also shared their ideas on good and ethical journalism and their views of best practice in the media.

Bambang Harymurti, CEO of Tempo Indonesia, and also a member of Indonesia’s press council, said the question is whether mistakes are made with “malicious intent”.

It’s very important that society has that understanding … A good journalist is not a journalist that never makes a mistake, but when they make a mistake, before anyone complains, they make a correction and tell the public.

He said that journalists should say to themselves: “When I write something I truly believe it is the truth and if later I find I made a mistake I will quickly correct it and tell the public”.

The issue of standards and ethics also moved to the online environment, with standards editor of the Associated Press Tom Kent asked to comment on the fact journalists who tweeted about the arrest of fellow reporters covering the Occupy Wall Street protests were told to stop doing so.

He said this was not considered “a competitive news situation”.

It was about the welfare of journalists. We told them to cut it out and I feel comfortable with that.

He added that when it comes to reporting generally on Twitter, the news agency has “an obligation to people who support AP” to preserve exclusives for the wire.

As for reporting online generally, the rules are “largely” the same, he said.

Do not have different standards. I think that one thing that has changed in the landscape is the existence of bloggers and they do play very important role in press coverage in lot of countries. We are very interested in helping to protect bloggers and not in providing tools that can be used against them.

Summing up, GEN consultant Aidan White said the question to be asked is:

How do we in journalism try to make sure the person producing the information, editing the information and putting it out has got a sense that they’re doing something as a part of public responsibility. That is the challenge.

As a result, he announced that GEN will launch a coalition for ethical journalism which will “bring in partners from the online industry, print, broadcast etc” and another debate on the topic has already been scheduled for GEN’s next summit in Paris next year.

He also shared the following links as useful resources on the topic of ethics and standards in journalism:

• The Ethical Journalism Initiative
• The Society of Professional Journalists
• Ethic Net
• News Ombudsmen

• PCC chair addresses issue of privacy in online media
• Baroness Ros Scott: Should the PCC be abolished?
• UK press regulation discussed at the Frontline Club
• Friday deadline for core participant status for next Leveson inquiry module
• Note to staff from News Corp’s Rupert Murdoch in full

One of the most high-profile US media bloggers, Jim Romenesko, has resigned his post at media standards non-profit Poynter after questions were raised about his use of verbatim quotes.

Erika Fry, an assistant editor at the Columbia Journalism Review, contacted Poynter’s Julie Moos to point out that Romenesko was consistently using passages of text verbatim from pieces he was writing about without using quotation marks.

It should be made clear that he was prominently linking to the source material, but Moos said that this posed the risk that the words “may appear to belong to Jim when they in fact belong to another”.

This style represents Jim’s deliberate choice to be transparent about the information’s origins while using the source’s own words to represent his or her work. If only for quotation marks, it would be exactly right. Without those quotation marks, it is incomplete and inconsistent with our publishing practices and standards on Poynter.org.

Romenesko has been writing for Poynter for 12 years and – according to Moos – the practice has been “extensive”, with spot checks going back to 2005 showing “multiple examples”.

Part of the problem was that Romenesko was allowed to publish his posts straight to the Poynter website without being subbed. He was the only staffer to be allowed to do so, and although other editors at Poynter read his work and the original pieces, Moos said, none noticed the duplication.

Romenesko’s initial offer of his resignation, after being contacted by Moos about the practice, was refused, but a subsequent offer has now clearly been accepted.

Moos noted in her post that some may find Romenesko’s practice “entirely acceptable and disagree that it is unclear or incomplete”, while some may find it “abhorrent and a journalistic sin”.

What do you think? Let us know on Twitter @journalismnews or in the comments below, or by email to joel at journalism.co.uk.

• Poynter: Memo from AP chief tells staff pension will be frozen
• Tip of the day from Journalism.co.uk
• Tip of the day from Journalism.co.uk
• Jay Rosen’s top 15 journalism linkers
• FTM: Google’s Eric Schmidt leaves newspaper conference ‘unscathed’

Director of community engagement and social media at the Journal Register Company, Steve Buttry, has published an incredibly useful handout on how and when to attribute in articles, which he refers to as “a matter both of journalism ethics and of strong writing”:

Readers are entitled to know where we got our information. If we are citing official statistics gathered by a government agency, that tells the readers something. If we are citing the contentions of an interest group or a political partisan, that tells the readers something else. If we don’t attribute our information, readers rightly wonder how we know that.

Buttry’s advice includes when a journalist should and shouldn’t attribute, giving specific examples, as well as the importance of using copy and paste carefully, how to link out to sources, how to attribute anonymous sources and how best to reference press releases.

Tipster: Rachel McAthy

If you have a tip you would like to submit to us at Journalism.co.uk email us using this link – we will pay a fiver for the best ones published.

• #Tip of the day from Journalism.co.uk – eight rules for accurate journalism
• #Tip of the day from Journalism.co.uk – investigative journalism
• #Tip of the day from Journalism.co.uk – journalism education advice
• #Tip of the day from Journalism.co.uk – links to lessons on using Pinterest
• #Followjourn @stevebuttry /community manager

The use of the image of Muammar Gaddafi’s corpse in coverage of his death caused much controversy earlier this month, as newsrooms across the country made decisions about which images to use and with what prominence. At the time newspapers and broadcasters swiftly sought to explain the reasoning for their decisions to their audience, with the BBC’s Steve Herrmann issuing a statement to say the BBC News site would be “working on ways to ensure that we can give appropriate warnings on our website when we think images from the news are especially disturbing”.

And the debate continues, with the Guardian’s readers’ editor Chris Elliot yesterday questioning the way in which the newspaper had used the images of Muammar Gaddafi’s corpse after it emerged he had been killed.

In a column published yesterday Elliot revealed that almost 60 readers wrote to him or the letters page to complain about the use of the images “as gratuitous, exploitative or triumphalist” while others posted criticisms online.

Elliot concludes that while he agreed with the decision to publish at the time, he is now “less convinced” about the manner in which they were used.

The scale of the photo on the newspaper front page of 21 October and prominent picture use on the website took us too close to appearing to revel in the killing rather than reporting it. And that is something that should feature in our deliberations the next time – and there will be a next time – such a situation arises.

Interestingly he added that in 2006, when the Guardian published images of Saddam Hussein after being hanged, it received more than 200 complaints.

However the Guardian’s media commentator Roy Greenslade does not agree with Elliot, arguing that “it was a valid journalistic response to this most extraordinary of news stories to publish the picture and to publish it big on the front page”.

It was news – gruesome, grisly, ghastly (choose your own shock adjective) news – and the images told a story of brutality and mob chaos that could not be explained in words alone.

• 2012 World Press Photo winners announced
• VisualEditors: Rocky Mountain News goes retro with final front page
• BBC trials News Radar project – how to see the ‘whole’ BBC news site
• Top 20 most clicked news stories on Facebook in 2011
• MediaGuardian: NY Times goes for front-page advertising

On Friday the High Court heard a number of phone hacking cases brought by a group of public figures against the News of the World, at a case management conference.

On Saturday the International Forum for Responsible Media blog reported that Mr Justice Vos suggested there should be four test civil cases “at a well-advanced stage”.

The selection is to be discussed by the claimants’ lawyers, Inforrm’s report by Judith Townend added, ahead of the next case management conference due to take place on 20 May.

Mr Justice Vos said he was most interested in finding out what happened, the extent of the interception activity, and what damages should be awarded.

He was keen to find the most time efficient way of doing this, with minimal cost: “Otherwise we will be going on forever. Some people may want to, but I don’t”.

The court had got to try a specific case and “can’t just try it in the ether”. There should be a guide as to what damages should be given in specific circumstances. For this reason, the cases selected would cover a range of issues. A trial – which would also cover generic issues – should be held at the end of 2011, or the beginning of next year.

Earlier this month News International admitted liability in a number of cases brought against the News of the World for phone hacking between 2004 and 2006.

In an announcement the owner of the tabloid said it would be making an “unreserved apology” to some of the claimants taking civil action against the title, in cases meeting “specific criteria”.

• Independent: Max Mosley ‘bankrolling’ legal costs of phone hacking victims
• News International phone-hacking statement in full
• New arrest in phone hacking investigation
• Independent: News International ‘on course to pay any damages against Glenn Mulcaire’
• News of the World on phone hacking: ‘What happened to them should not have happened’

Private investigator Glenn Mulcaire has been ordered to provide information identifying News of the World journalists who had asked him to hack voicemail messages, the Guardian’s Nick Davies reported yesterday.

The judgment opens the door to the eventual disclosure of evidence that could have a powerful effect on News International, Scotland Yard, the Press Complaints Commission and the prime minister’s media adviser, Andy Coulson, all of whom have claimed that Mulcaire acted without any official sanction from the News of the World.

This morning, the Inforrm blog reports on the judgement issued by Mr Justice Mann.

The judgement, handed down yesterday in the case of Phillips v News Group Newspapers, orders Mulcaire to provide information “relevant to the claim being brought by Nicola Phillips, a former employee of publicist Max Clifford’s company” against the News of the World in relation to allegations of phone hacking, Inforrm reports.

Mr Mulcaire sought to resist providing answers on the basis of the “privilege against self-incrimination”.  Mr Justice Mann agreed that the privilege was applicable but held that the evidence would be covered by section 72 of the Senior Courts Act, which removes the privilege in  inter alia, “proceedings for infringement of rights pertaining to any intellectual property or for passing off”.  As a result, the judge ordered that Mr Mulcaire should provide the information.

• Media Guardian: NOTW ordered to hand over phone hacking evidence to Max Clifford
• MediaGuardian: Phone records suggest 100 accounts hacked by NOTW
• Guardian: Andy Coulson denies phone-hacking at Sheridan trial
• Phone hacking: Lib Dem MP raises question of Tessa Jowell’s phone
• MediaGuardian: News of the World’s phone-hacking defence unraveling

Roshan Doug’s blog post ‘Check-out desk woman and Saddam Hussein’ for the Birmingham Post has been causing a stir on the site. Whether you agree or sympathise with Doug’s post, the readers’ reaction raises questions over what guidelines or control the title should exercise over the topics their bloggers write about.

Reporter and overseer of the Post’s blogs Joanna Geary has raised the question via Twitter:

This would be a moderation headache for staff working on a paper and would curtail many of the benefits of having a blogging platform in the first place. Doug’s post has certainly got the conversation going and limiting posts could lead to staler content.

But how much control can the publisher relinquish without endangering their reputation or causing grievous offense to its readership?

• Mediating Conflict: Blogging and the curse of comments
• Media Guardian: Anti-immigrant BNP member blogging on Telegraph
• #Tip of the day from Journalism.co.uk – multimedia blogging tools
• Crisis-mapping platform Ushahidi launches new simple service
• BBC News: Blogger celebrates 10 years

The annual report from the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has suggested that the number of complaints made to the body about online advertising is for the first time higher than those relating to TV or newspapers.

ASA received 2,980 complaints about the internet in 2007, though 72 per cent of these related to content and as such fell outside of the authority’s jurisdiction.

“Interestingly, these complaints are almost entirely about truth, accuracy, misleadingness, and availability – the ‘meat and drink’ of the ASA’s daily work on print and broadcast ads,” said Chris Smith, chairman of ASA.

“We hope for an early outcome to the detailed discussions under way within the industry, led by the Advertising Association, on the development of ways to ensure continued responsibility in advertising in new media settings.”

• Pulse: Press Complaints Commission to investigate Daily Mail over GP pay claims
• Food journalists launch Zester Daily to combat loss of Gourmet
• Media release: PCC appoints three new public members
• Hull Daily Mail criticised for tabloid journalism tactics against rival website
• Sir Christopher Meyer’s reading habits

Audio-visual: Online news videos/audio recordings/images should complement the story they accompany, not repeat it. Readers will not be happy if you simply ‘double-up’ on content. Tipster: Oliver Luft

Got a tip? Submit it here – we will pay a fiver for the best ones published.

• Tip of the day from Journalism.co.uk
• Tip of the day from Journalism.co.uk
• Tip of the day from Journalism.co.uk: enhance you audio/visual offering with slideshows – quick and easy
• Tip of the day from Journalism.co.uk: Shooting online video? avoid pans and zooms
• Tip of the day from Journalism.co.uk

I don’t mean to sound over emotional – it’ll just be the hormones acting on my smaller female brain – but I’ve got a problem with a report yesterday from the Associated Press about Charme Chacon, the Spanish defense minister.

The ministry has ordered its staff to stop browsing entertainment and sport websites during working hours. Says the report:

Spain’s Defense Ministry, run by a woman for the first time, has ordered its staff to stop browsing sports and entertainment Web sites while on duty, an official said Thursday.

A ministry official said the order was distributed this week, but did not come directly from the new minister, Carme Chacon, who took over last week as Spain’s first female defense minister. She is 37 years old and seven months pregnant.

What relevance do these points (in bold) have to the story? The order didn’t even come directly from Chacon, as the report states, so why let the copy imply that her gender and her pregnancy are somehow related to the situation?

Just in case there’s any confusion over this blog post – I am 24 years old and not pregnant.

• Ministry of Justice to reduce success fees in defamation cases
• Largest four Spanish dailies cut 39% of staff between 2003 and 2009
• Bangkok Post: 400 Thai websites ordered to shut down
• Al Jazeera calls for answers on whereabouts of journalist Dorothy Parvaz
• Social and mainstream media join forces to cover Afghanistan election

The sourcing and fact checking process for stories on the BBC News website must be addressed by management, the BBC trust Editorial Standards Committee has recommended.

The committee made the suggestions as part of its response to a complaint about an article on the site, which pointed to inaccuracies in the report on Congressman Joseph P Kennedy II’s marriage to Sheila Rauch.

During the complaints procedure, the online news team conceded to oversimplifying the story and admitted that this could mislead the reader.

More worringly the online team offered this reason for not having avoided the errors in the article in the first place:

“…we are writing for a general audience. While an online story can in theory be of any length, we do have constraints on our time and resources to devote to each story. Put simply, our staffing simply doesn’t allow us to go into the detail you [the complainant] outline in your email correspondence.”

The complaint about the article, which was published in June last year, was partially upheld by the committee, as the online team did amend the piece.

However, the Trust said the web team ‘should have acted more quickly in its responses to the complainant to ensure the story was corrected sooner than it was.’

The committee also resolved to write to management at the corporation to request a review of sourcing and fact checking of articles before publication on the website.

For full details of the recommendations read the committee’s findings.

• NYT: Fact-checking in the online age
• Nieman: Exploring a niche for non-niche fact-checking
• Politico: US local papers to syndicate fact-checking site PolitiFact
• HuffPost: Obama’s State of the Union address, now with real-time fact checking
• BBC Trust: bbc.co.uk internal search and external linking need ‘major improvements’

Having spent April 1 shadowing the two-person web video team at the Express and Star, I came away with:

• 3 minutes 41 seconds of video footage
• 14 minutes of audio
• 54 photos

After a day spent gathering the material I then spent approximately two days editing it for the piece on the site, entailing two slideshows with audio (40s and 48s), one audio clip (6mins 49s) and one video clip (2 mins 20s).

Okay – so I’ve not been specifically trained as a multimedia reporter, which might not make me the fastest when it comes to editing. But essentially two days work resulted in one feature.

Similarly, on the Express and Star‘s team, videojournalist Victoria Hoe spent two hours boiling down 16 minutes of footage into a 1min 50s final package.

The Express and Star’s set up with a dedicated video team trained on a Press Association videojournalism course means that it’s time well spent: they put up around 20 videos a week – many shot, edited and published in the same day – and are using the medium in a variety of ways to add value to other areas or stories on the site, as well as for standalone pieces.

But not all publishers have such well-established roles and departments and, having now experienced it first hand, trying to be an all-in-one multimedia reporter/editor/publisher is extremely time consuming.

This is why I voted for ‘Not on its own – video has to be part of a mixed media package from papers in the digital age’ in Journalism.co.uk’s poll on whether video can save newspapers.

While creating such a role may enable publishers to stretch their resources and staff to increase their multimedia content, the benefits of doing this for staff and the resulting content must be slim. As it is so time-consuming, surely it’s better to get it right?

From my day out last week ‘right’ to me means seeing video as a new way of storytelling. It can work with text, but should add something new to text articles and not just as a scripted piece to camera rehashing the article.

The VJs I spoke to said it was crucial to think visually and in sequences to ensure you get all the shots needed while on location. Think visually and video can become a great medium for explaining and representing stories in an alternative way to print.

What’s more it’s another way to reach out to your audience and new members of that readership, so if set up and executed well it will add value – and hopefully traffic – to your site.

• Mixed fortunes for top US newspapers in November traffic figures
• WAN 2008: Web TV Q&A with Kalle Jungkvist, editor-in-chief Aftonbladet.se
• Poynter: Online video proves big traffic generator for Miami Herald
• Americans spending more time consuming news, research suggests
• App of the week for journalists – 1st Video, to record and edit video on your iPhone or iPad

Business journalist Sarah Lacy’s interview with Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg at the SXSW conference is being torn to shreds by bloggers, because of Lacy’s anecdotal style and rambling questions.

Lacy’s response: an angry message to Twitter (flagged up by CNET) shown below.

Lacy’s interview is now being touted as teaching material for journalism professor Jeff Jarvis’ classes. On his blog, Jarvis says Lacy’s biggest mistakes were not knowing or listening to her audience and her treatment of Zuckerberg – who apparently had to interrupt her ramble to suggest she asked a question at one point.

A post on Adam Tinworth’s blog details the lessons that should be learnt from this interview, namely: ‘engage, know your occasion, do your research and don’t confuse yourself with the story’.

Well said – these are basic interview skills, but Tinworth’s post highlights how these rules should be applied in a new media environment. He points out that despite working in a social media area, Lacy has ‘no direct means of replying that isn’t mediated by others’.

Lacy’s credentials as a business reporter covering technology for BusinessWeek and author on the subject of Silicon Valley and Web 2.0 should have stood her in good stead for this interview.

But it seems her reputation was not sufficient to endear her to or engage with her audience or the blogosphere – after all the interview wasn’t supposed to be about her…

UPDATE – Lacy gives her reaction to the interview in a video response (from Omar Galagga)

• TechCrunch: Sarah Lacy – ‘Who the hell is enrolling in journalism school right now?’
• FollowJourn: @adders/RBI head of blogging
• Comment: The NUJ and new media – ‘bloggers rejoice in lower standards’
• Jarvis reflects on name-calling in the blogground
• Fallout from Jarvis’ ‘perfection vs beta culture’ post

Each week we give developers the opportunity to tell us journalists why we should sit up and pay attention to the sites and devices they are working on. This week it’s online rants about the perilous state of the news industry with AngryJournalist.com.

1) Who are you and what’s it all about?
I’m Kiyoshi Martinez. I’m a former journalist who’s now gone into government communications.

AngryJournalist.com is a simple concept. Type why you’re angry with your media job and hit “vent.”

It’s an airing of grievances, rants on the life of journalists and bitter tales from the newsroom. All the comments are moderated before posting in order to keep the site on topic.

I like to think of it as the punching bag for the news business.

2) Why would this be useful to a journalist?
Hopefully, the site helps relieve some stress. It’s probably not as helpful as professional therapy, but it’s less damaging than picking up other vices. Outside of this, I think it’s a great glimpse for newsroom managers and executives of what’s actually going on in the minds of their silently brooding employees. For all the over-the-top responses, there are kernels of truth there worth following up.

3) Is this it, or is there more to come?
There’s been some talk of others independently wanting to start up foreign-language versions of the site, which I think would be really neat, but I won’t be directly involved.

Another person is helping me with creating a widget for others to add to their blog and potentially a Facebook application. I’m considering the idea of doing a “best of today’s responses” list that will get sent out via Twitter, but I’m not sure if I really like that idea or not just yet.

I might take the time eventually to do a really thorough analysis of the responses and perhaps write something on it, but that’s further in the future. As someone who’s a nerd about data and loves to read reports, I know others might appreciate something like that.

Finally, I’m also debating if I want to add revenue-generating features to the site.

4) Why are you doing this?
It initially started as an experiment I wanted to conduct that stemmed from a variety of things I’d read, discussions I had with friends and just generally observing the industry turmoil.

I have my own opinions on the journalism industry and made up my mind to leave it, but I wanted to see the responses from those who’d been in the industry longer than me about their impressions of what’s wrong with the profession today. I was curious to know if others had thoughts echoing my own.

So, I created the site with the idea that I wanted to get the unfiltered, raw angst of the industry’s workforce in the most efficient way possible.

5) What does it cost to use it?
It’s 100 per cent free. Users will never be bombarded with advertisements while surfing the site, nor will they ever have to register, give an e-mail address or jump through any other hurdles to participate.

6) How will you make it pay?
From the beginning, I’ve made a commitment to not put advertising on the site. For me, the purpose of the site wasn’t to make money, but to provide a forum for the industry to be brutally honest with itself.

The costs associated with the site are extremely low and I consider the time spent like that of a person spending time on one of their hobbies. Plus, I see advertising as annoying and there’s increasing evidence that online display advertising is becomes less effective. I didn’t see a point in cluttering my layout and distracting from the content.

Still, this doesn’t mean I’m opposed to finding ways to cover the few costs I have and maybe make some additional cash. I’ve been toying with a few ideas.

One would involve creating a job board on the site. However, there are already several great resources for journalism jobs. I’d want to find a way to make my job board more effective and less impersonal.

Another idea is to sell merchandise. I really like the idea of AngryJournalist.com coffee mugs on the desks of reporters in newsrooms across the country. Also, T-shirts with some of the responses could be mildly entertaining.

I’m also considering writing a book based on the responses. Conceptually, I see it as part critique on the industry, part management techniques with a healthy dose of dark newsroom humour.

• Innovations in Journalism – Everyblock
• JEEcamp: Kyle Macrae on Scoopt: We’re all entrepreneurs now
• The death of Osama bin Laden: New York Times interactive gauges public opinion
• Paul Bradshaw, Twitter and the art of predicting the interview
• CNN: ‘Are you a newspaper person?’ asks iReport