This has been quite a busy semester for my Multimedia Journalism students. They’ve gone from having little (if any) experience with HTML and online media to building and designing their own Web sites. Additionally, they’ve all created fabulous slide shows, audio-stills features, interactive maps, Web video, and so much more in the span of a few short months.

As if this hasn’t been enough, each student will be expected to cover the famed Boston Marathon next week. Most students will cover the event LIVE via tools like Qik, Ustream, Utterli, Mogulus, BlogTalkRadio, SoundSlides and more.

You’ll be able to keep up with everything they’re doing starting later this week via this FriendFeed account:

Be sure to subscribe to the account so you can get updates. Or, just come back here on Marathon Monday and take a look at all of the great work the students have done!

Kudos to my colleague Steve Garfield for setting this up!

A few months back, I downloaded a few Twitter applications for my iPhone. Yes, more than one. I do that a lot with (free) apps since it’s the only way I can figure out which ones are right for me. When you use as many Web tools as I do (as often as I do) speed and usability become paramount.

The problem is, I never bothered using any of them. I’ve tried to get into Twitter, but micro-blogging has never really appealed to me–well, until now, anyway.

Long story short, I’ve recently come to accept two important facts of internet life:

1. Twitter isn’t the passing fad I thought it would be. To the contrary, it’s still gaining in popularity more than 2 years after its release. According to a February ‘09 report from Web traffic analysis site Compete.com, Twitter is now the third most popular social networking site behind Facebook and MySpace.
2. Twitter is a symbol how internet users are now essentially online all the time. Smart phones and WiFi have really changed where we connect, when we do it, and how often we can do it. We can both have lives and yet stay in constant connection with the Web and our peers, which is a huge shift from just a couple of years ago. Sure people still have their stereotypes: To a lot of folks, if you’re online, you must be at your computer in your mom’s basement, drinking a 2-liter Mt. Dew and arguing with strangers over which “World of Warcraft” characters are the coolest. But regardless of stereotypes, things are really changing. Look at teenagers: Even the cool kids are always texting, Facebooking, Twittering, etc.

As a self-respecting multimedia journalist, I know that I should accept Twitter as the increasingly popular tool that it is. Yet it’s that journalistic part of me that really needs to decipher what’s behind the popularity of this whole micro-blogging thing. Both Facebook and MySpace offer “status update” tools in addition to myriad cool features that Twitter doesn’t have. So why do we Twitter?

While even Twitter CEO Evan Williams can’t answer that question (as he’s stated in multiple interviews) perhaps the Times of London can. Just yesterday the Times published an article in which they asked several experts about the Twitter phenomenon. The conclusion was this: We Tweet because we have an underdeveloped sense of the self. Ouch.

From the article:

The clinical psychologist Oliver James has his reservations. ‘Twittering stems from a lack of identity. It’s a constant update of who you are, what you are, where you are. Nobody would Twitter if they had a strong sense of identity.’

‘We are the most narcissistic age ever,’ agrees Dr David Lewis, a cognitive neuropsychologist and director of research based at the University of Sussex. ‘Using Twitter suggests a level of insecurity whereby, unless people recognise you, you cease to exist. It may stave off insecurity in the short term, but it won’t cure it.’

For Alain de Botton, author of Status Anxiety and the forthcoming The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work, Twitter represents ‘a way of making sure you are permanently connected to somebody and somebody is permanently connected to you, proving that you are alive. It’s like when a parent goes into a child’s room to check the child is still breathing. It is a giant baby monitor.’

Those are some pretty strong accusations. But what do you think? Are those of us who Tweet or update our statuses on Facebook and MySpace narcissistic? Are we insecure? Do we need validation?

For me… I just think it’s fun. No harm, no foul. But what do you think? Are we truly just a bunch of big, fearful, attention-seeking babies?

Let me know. And while you’re at it, follow me (and my lacking sense of self) on Twitter. You can do that at right.

Kudos to Steve Garfield and my student, Nick, for this great on-the-fly chat about new media tools for journalists. Steve interviewed Nick today during the discussion section immediately following our class. You can listen to the clip right here:

Using only his cell phone, Steve had the above report and Nick’s picture online and ready to be viewed within minutes. Now it’s just six hours later, and so far more than 120 people have listened to the file.

If you’re interested in doing this kind of reporting yourself (as any self-respecting multimedia journalist should be) you should check out Utterli. With tools like this available all over the Web, there’s no excuse for any reporter with a decent cell to miss out on breaking news.

In other news, here’s my only contribution to cell-phone reporting today:

In my grocery store’s organic freezer section–right above the soy ice cream and next to the chocolate-covered frozen bananas–is the Yoghund, a yogurt treat formulated just for your dog. Yummy. Or should I say “yuppie”? (I also have a close-up shot of the text. I took both of these images with my iPhone and posted them via the iPhone WordPress application, which I once reviewed here.)

The Associated Press reported today that Joe The Plumber is headed to Israel to serve as a war correspondent for the conservative Web site Pajamas TV. In the off chance you don’t remember, Joe (actually Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher) gained national fame during election season when he asked President-elect Barack Obama about his tax plan. The McCain camp used a clip of the unflattering Q&A in an arguably well-fought attempt to gain support during the campaign’s final weeks.

As for Joe’s recent news, he plans to spend 10 days (and perhaps the rest of his 15 minutes) covering the Israel-Gaza conflict. His angle? Letting “‘Average Joes’ share their story.”

Now, I like the concept of reporting on Israelis’ daily lives and how war affects the average citizen. And, as a multimedia journalist, I also like the idea of regular citizens getting involved. The Web–including social networking sites, CNN’s iReport, Fox’s UReport, and blogs–has changed what it means to even be a journalist. It has grayed the line between “professional journalism” (e.g. the Associated Press) and “citizen journalism” (e.g., someone’s uncle’s blog on local UFO sightings or any other instance where non-professionals collect, report, analyze and disseminate news and information).

For better or worse, there is no Hippocratic oath for us in the media. And as much as I love my Society of Professional Journalists membership card, it’s not a license. Any argument against average citizens reporting the news is purely opinion-based. Surely any citizen, if he or she reports the truth, is a better journalist than Stephen Glass and Jayson Blair were in the end.

On the flip-side of things, I admit that I am more than a little uncomfortable at the prospect of Joe the War Reporter. To say the Israeli-Gaza conflict is a “serious topic” would be a gross understatement, and so I’ve got a lot of concerns: Does Joe have any journalistic training? Will he be fair to all parties involved in the conflict? Does he know the difference between objectivity and editorializing, and does he care? Will anyone be there to fact-check his work?

I’m leaving this one up to you guys. What do think about this issue? You don’t have to be a journalist to fill out this poll. In fact, I’m hoping to get a healthy mix of responses. If you do choose to take the poll, please elaborate upon your answer in the comments section.

Generally speaking, is citizen journalism a viable news source? (That is, do the pros outweigh the cons?) Yes No Not Sure

Note: I could be completely wrong to attach a time limit to Joe’s fame–a lot of Americans really seem to love him. Considering his personality and political leanings, he could wind up being the next Bill O’Reilly. O’Reilly, after all, didn’t start out as a reporter either.

When King Abdullah II bin Al Hussein of Jordan spoke to a packed auditorium today at the University of Mississippi in Oxford, his message was clear: Christians, Jews and even Muslims, such as himself, should learn to live in unity and with solidarity. Those individuals who alter the meanings of teachings from their own holy books are not true followers of their religions, he said, as each religion in reality places top value upon peaceful coexistence, rather than scripture-based violence.

“My religion, Islam, is why traditional Muslims decisively reject extremist violence and hatred,” the king said in his address. “The Koran says ‘O you who believe, enter into peace entirely,’ and it admonishes: ‘Do not transgress, truly God does not love the transgressors.’”

He went on to discuss acts of terrorism that have taken place worldwide and within Jordanian borders, such as the Amman bombings of last November, where the joyous celebration of a wedding turned quickly into a horrifying scene of violence.

The king said in thanks to the international community: “[W]hen Jordanians defied the terrorists; when thousands of our citizens marched in solidarity, Muslim and Christian, arm in arm, saying no to terror; when our country’s path of progress did not stop–people everywhere supported us.”

Notably, the king also espoused what some of what have become very unpopular opinions in the United States over the past few weeks. He said, for example, that the international community should respect the Palestinian decision to elect Hamas to lead their parliament, stating: “We have to respect their choice. For years the Palestinian people have expressed their desire for peace, and their respect for the legitimacy of international resolutions. Both peoples, Palestinian and Israeli are fed up with violence.”

“Establishing a viable, sovereign Palestinian state alongside a secure Israel,” he continued, “is the only way to restore stability and security.”

When it came to Iraq, Abdullah said that the international community as a whole has a responsibility to support the Iraqi people as they restore the stability and security of their country during this crucial rebuilding process.

Likewise, in order to prevent further violence and bloodshed, he said that it is the responsibility of world leaders to ensure that Iran will not acquire nuclear weapons.

Before I continue on with an analysis, I will provide for you the king’s speech in three forms:
[KING ABDULLAH SPEECH IN TEXT: (.PDF | .Doc); IN SOUND: 02032006abdullah.mp3 (00:14:01)]

Now to set things up so that we might move on to the subtext.

Long thought of as a bringer of peace politically and theologically akin to his father, the late King Hussein bin Talal, Abdullah has been a friend to the United States since his ascent to the throne in 1999.

It was under his reign that Jordan was admitted into the World Trade Organization. Likewise, his “Interfaith Message,” fashioned as a guide to create a pathway not just toward peace, but toward full acceptance and goodwill among the three major monotheistic religions (Islam, Christianity and Judaism) is considered one of the most forward-thinking statements on religion developed in recent years.

With that said, Abdullah is certainly not considered to be all that forward-thinking by the Jordanian press. He has amended his nation’s penal code to punish dissidents, and has been accused by many of his countrymen of being an opponent to free speech. Current Jordanian law prohibits all public criticism of the king and/or his policies, and violators can face up to three years in prison and fines as high as $7,000 (U.S.) Many journalists critical of Abdullah’s policies have been imprisoned for extended periods of time.

According to the Human Rights Watch in an article written last month, Jamil Abu Bakr, an editor for an opposing political party’s website, faces charges in relation to national security for posting articles that illustrate dissent from the king’s and current government’s policies.

According to Abu Bakr, prosecutors brought upon him charges early last month of “belittling the dignity of the Jordanian state.”

An article on the Human Rights Watch website states: “The charge refers to articles he posted in December 2004 on the website of the Islamic Action Front, a legal political party that has 17 members in the lower house of parliament. The articles, which criticized favoritism in the appointment of senior government officials, were written by two IAF parliamentarians, `Azzam al-Hunaidi and `Ali Abu Sukkar.”

Just months prior to these charges, in July 2005, the article claims that “senior government officials in Amman told Human Rights Watch that the authorities would eliminate press censorship and not apply articles of Jordan’s Penal Code that criminalize ‘insults’ to the king, or ’slander’ of government officials or institutions. The state security court tries most of these offenses criminalizing free speech.” (“Jordan: Editor Prosecuted for Posting Articles by MPs”)

It might be because of these free speech issues that the king declined to take any questions from the audience. All questions, in fact, came from “student polls” and were asked by a moderator. According to the students I spoke with, however, from regular undergraduates to those enrolled in the Sally McDonnell Barksdale Honors College and the Trent Lott Leadership Institute, no such student polling was ever conducted. If it was, they told me, then they were not aware of it.

Similarly, as you can see from the PDF linked above, journalists were instructed to strike a few sentences from the transcript of the king’s speech prior to his arrival this afternoon. The marked-out phrases read as follows:

“We behold with horror and disgust the recent targeting of Christian churches in Iraq, breaking with a 1,400-year tradition of Christian-Muslim friendship and mutual acceptance amongst the Arabs of the Levant. Equally, whilst we respect and revere freedom of speech, we condemn needless desecration and injury of Islamic sensibilities, such as the recent cartoons misrepresenting and vilifying my ancestor the Prophet (may peace and blessings be upon him).”

Abdullah did not address, and was not asked to address, his thoughts on free expression versus the dozen Danish cartoons depicting anti-Islamic themes. It is quite possible that the king’s advisors had instructed him to leave these comments out, and that the leader chose to comply. The simple fact is that we know what was left out, but we cannot say with certainty why.

All in all, despite the issues of free speech and expression going all but entirely unaddressed, the king–one of the world’s last sitting and effective monarchs–did bring to Mississippians a message that warrants repeating: the people who abuse religion, and not the relgions themselves, are responsible for belief-based terrorism.

In order to heal and to survive, it is imperative that we look beyond our differences and embrace our neighbors as our equals.

King Abdullah II bin Al Hussein of Jordan will speak at the University of Mississippi campus today to address a variety of issues, including yet not limited to: current political conflicts in the Middle East, Jordan’s attempts at creating unity among the faiths and the nation’s current internal reform process.

He will begin his address at 2 p.m. at the Gertrude C. Ford Center for the Performing Arts. Those who wish to attend are advised to arrive early, as the doors will close at 1 p.m.

The United States Secret Service will handle all security measures, and attendees will be asked to walk through metal detectors.

Large bags and electronic devices, such as cell phones, PDAs and CD or MP3 players, are prohibited. Cameras are allowed, but be advised that they will be inspected by security personnel.

If you cannot attend the address, but would like to experience the king’s speech, rest assured that it will be televised on channel 99 for local cable subscribers. Worldwide, people will be able to watch a webcast at the university’s web site.

Be advised that if you wish to view the webcast, you will need Windows Media Player 9 or better, or Quicktime 7, to see and hear the king.

For directions to the Ford Center, you may utilize the following map. The Center is building #126:

King Abdullah visits the university on the heels of his recent tour of Pakistan, India, China and Malaysia.

Prior to leaving Pakistan, the king stressed the need for improving trade relations, in terms of policy and economics, as well as on a person-to-person level.

He agreed with leaders that the current and impending nuclear stand off with Iran should be resolved peacefully.