Pointing to the Original
Over at ZDNet, David Berlind takes a deeper look at the transparency issue. He notes a posting that included an MP3 audio link of a key interview he did for the story. It's a fine idea.
In an ideal world I'd like to have had access to a full transcript as well, because I a) can read faster than I can listen; and b) I can quote more easily from text than audio. But that's asking a lot, partly because it's not cheap to get transcripts. Maybe someone will create a transcript of the audio file and post it somewhere else.
The Pentagon posts transcripts of major interviews with Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz, and has for some time. For example, there's this one.
But when people do this, they should be consistent. The Pentagon deleted a section in a Washington Post interview, and the Post promptly posted its own transcript containing the missing lines. The Pentagon cost itself some credibility in this case, after gaining it with its prior transparency.
Transparency is always in the eyes of the beholder. What is happening here is that information and news is getting filtered. What one thinks is 'good news', the other party thinks its 'bad news'. This brings me to the question of TRUTH. What is the truth and creditablity of any media ?? Either it be MSM or Blogs ??? Either way..
Posted by: /pd | January 19, 2005 at 05:28 PM
Doug Kay (Blogarithms, ITconversations) has a very good post about transcripts...
http://www.rds.com/blogs/doug/index.php/archives/2005/01/20/audio-recordings-and-transparency/
Posted by: PXLated | January 20, 2005 at 02:40 AM
Having been both a journalist and been an interviewee, I've found it freaks reporters out when you pull out your own recorder during an interview.
Posted by: Douglas Arellanes | January 20, 2005 at 06:14 AM
Douglas, I remember (too many years ago) interviewing the governor of Vermont. I pulled out my little tape recorder. He pulled out his. I said, "So it's dueling tape recorders." We both laughed. (It was a good interview, as I recall.)
Posted by: Dan Gillmor | January 20, 2005 at 07:03 AM
The trackback above talks about how I'm checking into offshoring of transcription. Also, I've established a more official Transparency Channel (http://radio.weblogs.com/0143327/) where I will routinely post raw materials (and not just audio) as a part of the ongoing experiment. For example, I already have a couple of e-mails up there and I'm categorizing them by story so that, once I figure out how to put the links up for my categories (please help if you know how), people will be able to narrow their view of the raw materials to single story basis.
Posted by: David | January 20, 2005 at 11:01 AM
I am an independent documentary filmmaker who is open sourcing the transcripts of my investigative film on the pre-war performance of the broadcast television news media.
I interviewed 45 journalists, think tank scholars, journalism professors, media critics and other experts. I've started posting transcripts over at http://www.echochamberproject.com/interviews/interviews.htm
I recruited volunteer citizen journalists to transcribe these interviews and a transcription process could go very quickly if 5-minute chunks were sent out to a large set of volunteers who were interested in participating in producing independent or commercial media.
I sent out 31 60 minute-interviews to 31 volunteers and there was an average four-week turn-around wait -- then the proofreading and normalization process takes about 4 hours per transcript.
But this idea can work at a quicker turnaround if the transcription is decentralized enough.
Check out EchoChamberProject.com for more information.
Posted by: Kent Bye | January 20, 2005 at 11:43 AM
I'm told there's a big bronze plaque at the Pentagon, with General Eisenhower's Farewell Address from 1961, when he left the Presidency.
It has the entire text of the speech -- except for the paragraph where he coined the expression "military-industrial complex."
Posted by: Neil Rest | January 23, 2005 at 10:29 AM