When a journalist gets their first job, or switches role to a new area or specialism, they need to quickly work out where to find useful leads. This often involves the use of feeds, email alerts, and social networks. In this post I’m going to explain a range of search techniques for finding useful sources across a range of platforms. Continue reading
Do you run one of the 33 million Twitter accounts whose passwords were hacked recently?
Did you once have a MySpace account, and are one of the 360 million whose passwords have been hacked?
Finding Snapchat accounts to follow is harder than it needs to be. There are some directories, such as Snapcodes, but these rely on user submissions. The iPhone app GhostCodes also ‘curates’ lists of accounts by category, but also relies on users giving their own usernames.
You can find some articles highlighting interesting accounts to follow on Snapchat. One useful search phrase to use for finding those is this:
Here are 4 useful techniques for tracking them down.
Method 1: The advanced search
The most obvious approach is to look for some articles highlighting interesting accounts to follow on Snapchat. You can narrow this a little by using search operators like
allintitle: (which restricts results to those where the words are in the page title).
One useful search phrase to use with this is: Continue reading
You can see the future coming.
- Original sharing on Facebook has seen a “double-digit decline“; the company is paying media companies and celebrities for live video to compensate for it, and has relaxed its rules about branded content.
- Twitter – which already has an active audience problem – buys the rights to Thursday night football. Continue reading
Every so often I come across a particularly useful guide to a social media platform. Below I’ve collected a bunch of them – let me know if you have seen any others. Continue reading
The Huffington Post’s UK editor-in-chief Stephen Hull has provoked a curious backlash on Twitter following an appearance on Radio 4’s Media Show where he was asked why he doesn’t pay writers, writes Alex Iacovangelo.
“I love this question,” he replied:
“If I was paying someone to write something because I want it to get advertising, that’s not a real authentic way of presenting copy.
“When somebody writes something for us, we know it’s real, we know they want to write it. It’s not been forced or paid for. I think that’s something to be proud of.”
Tweeters quickly condemned him for encouraging the tactic during a time when jobs are being cut and budding journalists struggle to financially survive.
Below are some of the tweets, you can read the rest on this link:
(Note: @edcaesar quoted Stephen Hull)
@edcaesar In that case, he should refuse his salary – we wouldn’t want his corrupted paid-for editing would we? His editing should be “real”
— Stuart McGurk (@stuartmcgurk) February 18, 2016
@edcaesar Ed, this is a disgusting way to treat people. And to quote yourself like that! I thought more of you. This is where we part.
— Letters of Note (@LettersOfNote) February 18, 2016
— Stephen Killick (@SteveKills) February 18, 2016
.@edcaesar When I scream ARSEHOLE at him, nobody will be paying me. He’ll know it’s real.
— Eddie Robson (@EddieRobson) February 18, 2016
@edcaesar Bullshit. This fellow just needs to admit they are too cheap to pay authors & too corrupt to share earning off their writing!
— Nuzhat S. Siddiqi (@guldaar) February 18, 2016
— Torraine Walker (@TorraineWalker) February 18, 2016
@edcaesar Which is why I stopped writing for them – also because they don’t promote the writing, and also because of the Sidebar of Shame.
— Judi Sutherland (@judi_sutherland) February 18, 2016
@edcaesar No. Are you insinuating that people who do get paid for their work are less real? THIS is why I did not choose to write for you.
— Wordtasting (@Cookwitch) February 18, 2016
— That Dave McKinnon (@DaveMcKinnon__) February 18, 2016
.@edcaesar What’s even worse is that “exposure” hungry writers do it, not realising that all it adds to their CV is: “Happy to be exploited”
— Sam Rowe (@samrowe_) February 18, 2016
Maybe it’s the HuffPost UK editor’s salary that is making them speak such inauthentic bollocks @edcaesar
— Abi Wilkinson (@AbiWilks) February 18, 2016
@edcaesar Surely has opposite effect. If not getting paid then fuck it, if all elements of a piece arent 100% correct what are they losing?
— Simon Margolis (@Si_Margolis) February 18, 2016
@edcaesar Another interpretation: because we don’t pay them, there’s no onus on them to write truthfully or do proper research.
— Bobbito Ball (@bobbitoball) February 18, 2016
— asta (@asta) February 18, 2016
— Alt Cricket (@AltCricket) February 18, 2016