In an editorial conference workshop I recently asked a young writer, why they are so readily and frequently engages in their articles to nouns, especially to those from the Substantivierungskiste. In their exercise product is teeming with words such as "start", "light" or "energy".

She gave me a disarmingly honest answer. "I think it sounds kind of clever"

When you read in books, newspapers and on websites is then recently I noticed that it probably stands not alone with this opinion even among professionals. As our German language popes can therefore still struggling so much - all calls to provide the nominal style punishable seem futile. In a book about Web 2.0, for example, the author formulated the following sentence:

But in the social network (sic) put much more: it holds considerable potential to improve the interaction with the readers, listeners and viewers, for internal information and communication and to improve collaboration, communication and knowledge management in the newsrooms and media companies.

What?

To my mind, it sounds stilted unnecessary. The fundamental problem with sentences of this type is that they send the readers into the abstract, they obscure the meaning. The author has when writing - indeed had anything specific in mind, but unfortunately the 14 nouns used in the second sentence disguise the fact - maybe. Even though I do not know, of course, in detail, exactly what the author wanted to say with his sentence, he could have said it more clearly. Something like this:

But in the social network puts much more potential: it encourages the readers, listeners and viewers to participate. It intensifies and accelerates the mutual information between colleagues in the newsroom. And allows any employee at any moment, to access exactly the information that is currently required.

This version sounds really stupid now than the original sentence? I can not find.

My Tip: Add any writing tool box is a hammer for smashing superfluous nouns.

When would always want to sneak too many nouns in a sentence, they take this hammer in his hand and cut them on top of each extraneous noun. Fixed! And remember: Above all derived nouns are a nightmare because they are nothing more than prisons for fresh and cheerful verbs.

In "energy" for example, the verb put, "generating" in "Start" maybe "start", an "account" in "consideration". So they smash the Substantivierungsmauern, liberate the verbs from their cells and take them into their sets. You will see: The less nouns are used, the more effect the sentences. Or does it sound now still smarter if I rephrase: Reducing the number of nouns in the sentence structure requires regular clarification regarding the sentence to be switched with a statement?

My "crap that falls from summer this year!" Obsession I've already visible maintained at this point in recent weeks. After a triefnasigen forced break last weekend (Schneuz) I put this editorial line now regardless readers losses continue - with a beautiful watch anything Superduperslomovideo (via fines ). It shows the free fall slightly summery dressed people of elevated river banks into the refreshing water. To become jealous, right? Well, the weather was so hot during the filming probably also apparently not:

Bye, have a nice weekend (...'m off now and go to the Elbe)

Their
Stefan Heijnk

Nea has Matzens book titled Online Journalism in the printed form about the size of the postcard size A6. So it is more of a booklet. Who takes it for the first time in his hand, is therefore perhaps at first have the thought: Well, so small and thin (150 pages), there may not actually be much in it. But appearances can be deceptive enormous: Matzens Mini Manual, published in March 2010 in the series "Directions journalism" at RRP, is a compact and practical as well Compendium for online journalism.

Written Fast
With its pragmatic "To" - and "You should base" approach, with its "Note" - and "Definition" boxes, with tips and tricks, and numerous links to relevant examples it sets a successful, necessarily useful guide Title on the table. Moreover, the whole thing is written smoothly and there is an accompanying website, ready on the left printed in the book for comfortable clicking. Typing unnecessarily - as befits das.

As in any other book too, there is in the detail in some places quite sure cause for criticism or opposition. This concerns in particular the look here: The many boxes, example boxes and mini screenshots typeface looks a little confusing sometimes. And the writing in some screenshots is felt at point 2 or point 3, is likely to be simply unreadable for so many readers. On the other hand, there are also aspects of content that is not entirely convincing: What, for example, is justified when the old Weblegende is repeated and recommended never to "Click here" to label a website link? Or: Is an animation from the website of the New York Times really a good example of multimedia storytelling, when it lacks a "pause" button and the self-running animation of the user can not be stopped? (Web source, last visited on 12.08.2011: http://www.nytimes.com ).

Since selective doubts are so attached to, even if it is really just criticism of trifles. Because on the other hand, there are also in detail to discover a lot Profitable - the reference to an online Teleginitätstest for aspiring Webvideomoderatoren (of Videocue) to the online comparison of teaser lengths renowned sites. With one sentence: Who is onlinejournalistisch worked for the Nea offers Matzens compact mini manual a wealth of useful tips, tricks and suggestions.

CONCLUSION
Definitely a buy recommendation.

This review is the same version appeared in "r: k: m - reviews: communication: media" , published by the Institute of Journalism at the University of Dortmund.

To a straight to the point: Anton Simons sets for those who get an overview of the impact of Mitmachweb on journalistic work processes and better understand the changing media consumption habits of the people want a useful book before.

Simons has largely what he promises in the introduction: He wants to show with his book, "the consequences, the social network for journalism and journalists, for editorial work and media company" and "inform about changes in expectations, usage habits and self-understanding of media consumers and the consequent transformation of the requirements for journalists "(p. 9).

For this purpose it first 100 pages detail the publication tools of Mitmachweb before (a blog about wiki to social music and event platforms), then the dramatic change that these instruments induce for journalistic publishing sketches (on 50 pages), and finally predicts how this change can impact on journalism, the editorial organizations and ultimately to the journalists (on the remaining good 70 pages).

What does the long tail for journalists
Content Simons provides a substantial and plausible analysis of the changing relationship between media owners and media recipients. He has this perspective on two important trends in the media system towards one hand, the media recipients emancipate themselves from the traditional interpretive editorial media companies and not treat them as consumers, but as prosumers (ie, as consumers, who also themselves are active as producers themselves). And secondly to establish the Internet-economic frameworks that provide the ancestral lucrative business models of entire industries in question. Here Simons takes prominently on Chris Anderson's long tail on the economic model, ie the idea that the Web opens up the offer niche as the main source of revenue.

Independent of traditional media companies
As a result, Simon sees engmaschigeres create a media system in which professional journalism and public meet as equals. Will have a future only those providers, as Simon decide to implement this fundamental change in prosumentenorientiert reasonable offer shapes and involving people as participants in their value creation processes. Although this core thesis is not quite so young: The media market it has long not yet gotten around to in any publications.

For journalists open up the same course entirely new distribution channels and thus sources of income (crowdfunding, Selbstpublizieren e-book journalism start-ups for hyper-local issues, etc.). Partially, as Simons, is journalistic activity might tend to frequent loose from traditional publishers as an employer and worthwhile for their own account with their own direct audience. Here he refers back to thinking about how it has developed, for example, Jeff Jarvis some time ago.

Not without contradictions
In essence Simons analysis is certainly agree: Media providers will no longer vaporize their audience in the traditional top-down direction from above with content, but transform audiences into communities and seriously maintain (have to). Thus, although not change the journalistic standards such as Simon rightly points multiple times, but it changes the role of journalistic self-image. Nevertheless, some of his statements is worthy of discussion. Just one example: Why the future, the number of salaried journalists will necessarily shrink, even if the sketched by him cross-media newsrooms of the future generate a variety of new job profiles, for example, is not sufficiently illuminated by the author. This harms the book but not in any way, because these contradictions rather the form from what is currently registering in the media practice: a still wide uncertainty about the development of journalism.

Defects, especially in the dramatic
Should not remain unmentioned that the book also some that reading has annoying flaws. This includes, for example, not always a really positive dramaturgy, such as when the detailed analysis precedes the context of discovery. So Simon describes the beginning of his book, very detailed and knowledgeable publication tools of Web 2.0, is devoted to but only after the central question (Chapter 3, "The media revolution"), why a knowledge of these tools - blogs about social tagging to wikis - is so critical to the future of journalism. Here is bridled the horse from behind. In the reverse order that would have been sure of meaningful arranged. The topicality of the book is not really convincing for the topic: With few exceptions, Simon works with sources from the year 2009. For a book that gives as published in 2011, this is amazing. An accompanying website would therefore have done the book good. Moreover, in addition to being too many spelling and grammar errors annoying especially the occasional redundancies, some passages set appear later in almost identical on again.

CONCLUSION
Nevertheless, the book is as important as reading. Simon relates the designs and models by Chris Anderson and Jeff Jarvis on the German media landscape and lined them with numerous practical examples. His book offers an overall clear how substantial in long distances analysis of the profound impact of Web 2.0 on the professional journalism.

This review is the same version appeared in "r: k: m - reviews: communication: media" , published by the Institute of Journalism at the University of Dortmund.

The colleagues of Kress.de brought it first. And it was probably the most important message of the week: The seasons are renamed. To be precise: The summer is renamed. details I spare myself the grounds of serious danger level Limbo.

On the other hand: it has its good side, if the summer goes. In any case, we are left in 2011, the otherwise inevitable Dudelwettrennen on radio and television to the dubious title of "Summer Hit of the Year" in all probability saved. Is that nothing? Or are you a couple of liters of rainwater per square meter as unpleasant as this:

Now please do not say yes!

In this sense I wish you - again - hopefully a sunny weekend

Their
Stefan Heijnk