Mozilla Festival and the fellowship announcement
Post categories: 91Èȱ¬ News website
| 11:40 UK time, Friday, 9 November 2012
Back in July we announced that we'd be working with the Knight-Mozilla fellowship for a second year and invited applications from people passionate about working with technology and journalism, and keen to have an impact in this area at the 91Èȱ¬.
My colleague, senior product manager Andrew Leimdorfer, has this update:
We are pleased to announce that we have decided on our new Knight-Mozilla fellow, Noah Veltman, who will be starting with us in January 2013.
Noah is one of eight 2013 fellows who will all be announced at this weekend's sold-out in London who will be based in news organisations around the world, including the Guardian and the New York Times.
There are so many ways that technology is changing journalism that our first challenge is going to be to make a choice about which of these areas Noah will be helping us with next year. Working on new data visualisations and developing innovative content for mobile web will be high on the list.
We welcome Noah to the team and wish all the Knight-Mozilla fellows all the best in 2013.
Comment number 1.
At 9th Nov 2012, Arthur Daley wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 9th Nov 2012, benbowlane wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)
Comment number 3.
At 9th Nov 2012, Pratish wrote:I think the Knight-Mozilla Fellowship is an amazing forward-looking program - read a recent comparison between and for me, it's initiatives like this one that sets the 91Èȱ¬ a league apart. Lucky Noah - am sure it'll be a fun year ahead for him!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 3)
Comment number 4.
At 9th Nov 2012, Sizwe M wrote:I hope that interactivity is a strong theme for the K-M fellowship this year - judging by the mobile US election stats I think that's a logical area to focus on.
@3. Pratish - that comparison is just wrong on so many levels! Judging by the 91Èȱ¬ digital platform post-Olympics I think SABC is probably sitting in the Middle Ages.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 4)
Comment number 5.
At 9th Nov 2012, Craig Smith wrote:Congrats to Noah - I can only imagine it'll be a memorable experience for him and the other 7! In terms of the KM initiative, I think the data visualisation opportunities with respect to social media and will be a really interesting area.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 5)
Comment number 6.
At 9th Nov 2012, Joseph Reddy wrote:@ #5 Craig Smith - I think you may want to check out the work done by Tony Hirst and 91Èȱ¬ College of Journalism on mapping social networks visually using tools like Gephi - you can find it here: /blogs/blogcollegeofjournalism/posts/How-to-map-your-social-network
Complain about this comment (Comment number 6)
Comment number 7.
At 9th Nov 2012, Arthur Daley wrote:I think the 91Èȱ¬ needs focus and perspective currently lacking. It is difficult in 400 Chrcs to list so lets look at one topic the US elections
Bookmakers - around the world - from a long way out had Obama odds on and Romney 7/4. Obama steadily tightened to 1/6 with Romney going to 4/1
Yet this election was reported as yoyo-ing when it clearly was not. Some comment was verging on the bizarre
Complain about this comment (Comment number 7)
Comment number 8.
At 10th Nov 2012, paulmerhaba wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 8)
Comment number 9.
At 10th Nov 2012, Jerry Hatrick wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 9)
Comment number 10.
At 12th Nov 2012, maskidaski wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 10)
Comment number 11.
At 12th Nov 2012, Arthur Daley wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 11)