What kind of potential do you think Telegram and other mobile messaging apps that encrypt data have?
Specifically, do you think this sort of thing has potentially to provide a virtual form of assembly? To communicate information to the Russian or other censored masses?
What might this kind of technology's shortcomings be?
Interesting to see that the runner up - Newsday - was selected for using digital tools to expose shootings, beatings and other concealed misconduct by some Long Island police officers. This highlights the increasingly complimentary role of digital tools and traditional reporting.
Anyone know what kind of digital tools they used?
Anyone know of other digital tools journalists/the press use to investigate/uncover content?
It might not be practical, but I like the idea of using tech to receive the message rather than send it - in other words, that there might be a way for people on the ground to send a message without tech, since that's something that is inaccessible there.
One is blatant - i.e. sexual harassment, prejudice, and discrimination.
The second is latent - i.e. the "typical experience of every student," as you put it, impacts people differently depending on a number of things including their gender. By not taking those individual differences into consideration, the culture of STEM forces women to work harder to fit in and balance their gender-specific circumstances.
True. And I wonder how computers/bots might assist journalists in the other aspects of journalism - investigation, interviews, and trend spotting, etc?
I'm not sure I hope for the day that computers replace the human analysis, emotion, or opinion in news, but I do believe they could help journalists better spot leads and dig into stories. This would free journalists up to do less leg work and more thinking about the content in front of them.
That said, the process of investigation, etc. does contribute to the experience a journalist brings to the table, so the question then is, does cutting out the legwork undermine a journalists ability to deeply understand and analyze a given story?
This is interesting in respect to @harrf's comment above.
He says, "Given an existing user base, on average 30% will hate any given change to their user experience, independent of whether the that experience is actually worse or better."
I wonder how @harrf's number would play out over time as users adjust, get used to, and accept changes the way many Apple users do. I'm not convinced that designers always know what's best for users, but I do think it sometimes takes a little while for users to catch on to the long-term benefits designers are designing for.
Thanks for both of your comments. They remind me of something I recently learned from a General Assembly Front Row class - that there are passive and active approaches, both of which can be equally valuable, to solving every problem.
@jtfrench, you've outlined a passive approach for an individual to take in the sense that this is something you can do internally to adjust your expectations and envision your success.
@bane, you've outlined a proactive approach for an individual to take in the sense that this is a proactive tactic one can use to find jobs.
I believe if individuals both take these, and other, passive and active approaches they will best position themselves for success. At the same time, there is a third part of the equation - which is the role of others in someone's success. This begs the question: what are the passive and active approaches others in HR and in the community can take to mentor, prepare, and offer opportunities to diverse talent?
Ultimately, we all need to work together to proactively bring diverse talent on board, since as the article points out, "this casual discrimination has been bad for business."
What other methods did you guys use to investigate "unpublicized" events/occurrences? What barriers did you face to finding that info in general?