Why your brain likes news of the weird

Blame it on your cortex. That's what tech guru Jeff Hawkins might say about our obsession with what we not-so-fondly refer to as "news of the weird" - those so called human interest stories that don't really affect anyone but take up a huge amount of space in print and broadcast news.

In his book On Intelligence (2004), Hawkins explains how the thin sheet of cells that make up our cortex determines what we know and what we perceive. It's all based on patterns, he writes, and if something doesn't match that pattern - we notice.

"Several times a second ... your brain makes a prediction about what it will see next. When that prediction is wrong, your attention is immediately aroused." - Jeff Hawkins, On Intelligence

So that's why stories about bizarre crimes, traffic accidents and human oddities sell. We're noticing things that are unpredicted or out of place.

Creativity results from unpredictability as well but in a different sense. Hawkins explains that creativity happens when artists mix the expected with a hint of the unexpected:

"There is a contradictory tension in what makes a work of art great. We want art to be familiar yet at the same time to be unique and unexpected."

Creative writers (think Shakespeare) will use metaphors or analogies to what's familiar to get our attention.

Should journalists go for the easy sell or the more nuanced approach? Both will get noticed but one takes a lot more work.

For more on Jeff Hawkins' brain theory - check out this video on TED on how brain science could change computing. It's interesting - and creative!

There's no "daily" in the new Oklahoman

Is the new Oklahoman ("for a new Oklahoma") a print product online or an online product in print?

Ed Kelly (I'm guessing he's the publisher - no graphic tells us) announces the new print redesign in an online video.

The big changes include: splashy color, narrower format, fewer front page stories jumping to the inside (can you say USA TODAY) and the loss of the word "Daily."

This could signal one of two things:
1. The publisher understands news is no longer on a 24-hour cycle; it's constant because of the Internet.
2. We're about to see a hybrid approach with the print product coming out a few times a week as a supplement to the online edition.

The emphasis on special sections (sports, entertainment and Sunday edition) makes me think the latter is possible throughout the industry.

That's been my prediction for awhile - a newspaper still will be published but not seven days anymore. Maybe it will free up some resources to get back to quality journalism. But that would only occur if the experienced reporters and editors aren't laid off or bought out in the convergence process.

Yes Virginia, The Sun is Setting

"Papa says, 'If you see it in the Sun it is so. Please tell me the truth; is there a Santa Claus? "
-Virginia O'Hanlon

An attempt to give new life to one of the oldest names in newspaper history has failed. The new New York Sun is folding today after a seven-year run. The reason: failure to make a profit.

In 1897, 8-year-old Virginia O'Hanlon wrote her letter to the original Sun (which merged with the World Telegram in 1950) asking about Santa Claus. Francis Pharcellus Church replied with a now classic editorial which began...

"VIRGINIA, your little friends are wrong. They have been affected by the skepticism of a skeptical age."

The Sun was the first successfully mass marketed newspaper of the 19th Century. Publisher Benjamin Day sold it for a penny and focused the content on local news, sex, violence and human interest stories. That move started the Penny Press era and - for better or worse - defined news as it exists today. In fact, it was an editor of the Sun who first coined the definition of news as "man bites dog."

A look at the new Sun's Web site shows why it wasn't able to compete on a digital playing field. The same day the Sun is folding, Poynter announced the redesign of three papers: the Hartford Courant, Chicago Tribune and the Oklahoman, which bills itself as "designed to connect with you."

We still live in a skeptical age, but maybe we can hope that our definition of news will evolve online for the better.

Then again, anyone want to see what happens when you mix Mentos Mints with Coke?

The Power of One - Blog

In some ways, we want them (students)to use these new media tools rather than these tools just using them.
-Anthropology Professor Michael Wesch who uses Twitter, wikis and Facebook during his classes at the University of Kansas.

A journalism student at NYU has generated a lot of attention because of her use of new media tools. Alana Taylor posted a blog in the PBS MediaShift column (which I found out about through Twitter and RSS feeds). In the post, headlined "Old Thinking Permeates Major Journalism School," she complained about a lack of new media classes at NYU. The post generated dozens of comments from journalism educators and onlookers across the country.

The comments ranged from supportive to accusations that Alana has attention span issues and a bad attitude. While some railed against blogs, none seemed to notice that their very discourse was possible because of a blog (imagine how many letters to the editor that discussion would have taken on paper - and how many days to print them).

Today, MediaShift host Mark Glaser posted a follow up, detailing how Alana's professor (the only one utilitzing new media in the classes) was now forbidding her to blog or Twitter about the class while in the class (it's not clear that she ever actually did that).

Whether blogs are useful in journalism classes isn't my point here (although I believe they are). My interest is the great divide between the old methods of teaching journalists and what some believe the new methods should be.

In the book Situated learning, Legitimate peripheral participation (there's a catchy phrase), researchers Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger describe how apprentices learn their trade from practitioners. It's a gradual process that sometimes creates conflict with the old timers because the newcomers don't just model and repeat what the experts do. Eventually, they change the practice. Technology is changing the media in ways we never could have envisioned. Some old timers are embracing this change along with the newcomers; others resist it.

Another part of Vygotsky's learning theory addresses the role everday actions by individuals can play in creating social change. Clearly, bloggers and social networks are transforming the way people interact with each other and how they get their information. Many of us old timers shy away from blogging or networking tools - dismissing them as a digital playground. But by developing a better understanding of the underlying processes, even we old timers can use these new cultural artifacts to enhance learning and help spread quality news and information.

Does the Situation Matter?

Turns out there are two major theories about how people learn. One is based on cognitive psychology and centers around the idea that the human brain functions like a computer. Information in - information out. This notion would support the idea of standardized testing that seems to be so popular today with everyone but students and teachers (what do they know?).

Another major school of thought (pun intended) focuses on learning as it relates to the social situation. This theory, made popular by a Russian psychologist named Lev Vygotsky, says humans must interact with each other, using cultural tools and language in order to learn. This is known as situativity theory.

Most people who study this sort of thing (which now includes me) agree that the key to learning is a combination of cognitive processes (in the head) and situativity (social interaction).

So what does this mean for modern-day journalism? It means not to discount the power of social networking tools like wikis, Facebook and Twitter! If people start passing around legitimate news stories on sites like those (in addition to updates about their moods and faves) - they are likely to be better informed. Also, the reader's ability to interact with the information could increase their understanding of it.

Take a look at sites like the Las Vegas Sun, which offers interactive graphics to show everything from a timeline of the Strip to flight delays. Or go to Minnesota Public Radio, where you can play a federal budget game and immediately see the impacts of your choices.

Could it be that the Web 2.0 emphasis on interactivity, social networking and user-generated content amounts to more than just performing cool tech tricks and finding old friends? Those cultural tools could be the digital keys to helping people stay informed. Quality journalists will always be necessary to supply the stories - but a new focus needs to be placed by the media on how people can interact with the information and in what form it is most effectively delivered to them.

Should journalists care how people learn?

So, I'm finally back blogging after a brief pit stop on the road to what is surely going to be a challenging but exciting trail for me (she types hopefully). Having talked the talk in local TV news for more than a dozen years, written a fair amount online and taught journalism skills to college undergrads, I am going back to school as a teacher and student. Again.

It's been a mere 22 years since I received my master's degree from Northwestern's Medill School of Journalism. Since then, laptops and iPhones have made typewriters and phone booths cultural icons of an era reminiscent of big hair and landfills.

Those fancy little digital devices also have had an unwelcome effect on an industry rooted deep in my own ancestry. Craig's list, eBay and Yahoo have lured readers and advertisers away from the printed page. Not only are newspapers thinner, so are their newsrooms.

Two days ago, I returned from Washington, D.C., where more than 700 people attended the Online News Association's ninth conference. Think about how transformational the last nine years have been for the media.

This year's buzzwords: innovation and mobile. The news industry is finding itself in a spot similar to where it was in 1995, when editors started to slowly realize that the Internet was morphing into an unconstrained and unlimited information factory. Now cellphones threaten to make things even more complicated as the younger demographic prefers to get their news on the go.

I have chosen to pursue my doctorate in educational technology - not because of latent masochism - but because of my desire to understand not only how technology is changing information delivery, but how people learn. We journalists focus on inverted pyramids, catchy leads and A.P. style...but how well has that worked for us? Is the public better informed than it was 22 years ago?

My broadcast brethren may think they are exempt from the digital competition. But when video on demand becomes as common as cellphones, the breaking news alert will turn inward. The old days are over. The audience has digitized and divided.

If our common goal as journalism practitioners and instructors is to inform citizens so they can make intelligent decisions about their lives, we must figure out how to deliver information in the most effective manner. All journalists are teachers, really. So let's start by finding out how people learn and how technology can help us teach them.