I thought to myself, “Really? Another deconstructed tower in the distance?”

Instead of immediately identifying it as the Washington Monument, which I’ve seen countless times in films, and on TV, I thought of this:

So, when I was heading into DC to find the Vault-Tec offices, this is what I thought I was heading towards, Vault-Tec sounding suitably like the sci-fi occupants for a sci-fi building. And when I finally came out of a side-street, and onto the Mall, and saw the Capitol at one end, and the charred and decrepit corpse of the Monument at the other, my jaw fell to the floor, even more heavily than it would have done if I’d realised what it was when I first saw it at a distance.

Is my imagination and memory tainted by the created worlds I’ve played in all these years?

It would seem so…

I know Geoff & I have talked about how Prince of Persia & GTA impinged upon our view of the world – play PoP too much, and you suddenly see the town around you as an obstacle course. Play GTA too much, and everything takes on a hyper-real quality, with violence always seemingly moments away.

But this is the first time I think I’ve mistaken a real-world artifact for one from a virtual world.

Scenius

The geography of scenius is nurtured by several factors:

•  Mutual appreciation — Risky moves are applauded by the group, subtlety is appreciated, and friendly competition goads the shy. Scenius can be thought of as the best of peer pressure.
•  Rapid exchange of tools and techniques — As soon as something is invented, it is flaunted and then shared. Ideas flow quickly because they are flowing inside a common language and sensibility.
• Network effects of success — When a record is broken, a hit happens, or breakthrough erupts, the success is claimed by the entire scene. This empowers the scene to further success.
•  Local tolerance for the novelties — The local “outside” does not push back too hard against the transgressions of the scene. The renegades and mavericks are protected by this buffer zone.

Sabotage

(1) Insist on doing everything through “channels.” Never permit short-cuts to be taken in order to expedite decisions.
(2) Make “speeches.” Talk as frequently as possible and at great length. Illustrate your “points” by long anecdotes and accounts of per­ sonal experiences. Never hesitate to make a few appropriate “patriotic” comments.
(3) When possible, refer all matters to committees, for “further study and considera­tion.” Attempt to make the committees as large as possible — never less than five.
(4) Bring up irrelevant issues as frequently as possible.
(5) Haggle over precise wordings of com­munications, minutes, resolutions.
(6) Refer back to matters decided upon at the last meeting and attempt to re-open the question of the advisability of that decision.
(7) Advocate “caution.” Be “reasonable” and urge your fellow-conferees to be “reason­able” and avoid haste which might result in embarrassments or difficulties later on.
(8) Be worried about the propriety of any decision — raise the question of whether such action as is contemplated lies within the juris­ diction of the group or whether it might conflict with the policy of some higher echelon.

Which of these does your workplace resemble?

Would a CJ hub have the clout to get access? How can privileged access be rested from the hands of the actors when both the source & the journalist have a vested interest in their privileged relationship?

The trend towards transparency should make more info more available – a concerted effort to make difficult to obtain information easily accessible would ease the barriers to entry for Citizen Journalists to do low-level fact-checking & investigation. The bureaucracy of obtaining this information might scale – the frustration/time sink of the red tape could be reduced by an automated/technologically augmented process.

If investigative journalism is the correlation of heretofore hidden data, then by reducing the time/cost/effort of uncovering that data would/could lead to more time/effort being available to spend on identifying correlations.

*The slow death of the small city newspaper.

If sub-1million-inhabitant cities lose their newspapers, can CJ take up the investigative slack in time to prevent increases in corruption/nepotism?

Could there be a Craigslist-type disruptive tool/service for CJ? [Is there already?]

How could the integrity of such a service be maintained… by peer review? Whuffie? Could a mainstream news organisation lend its reputation – The New Orleans Grauniad? Would automated ads reduce/eliminate undue editorial influence?

Individual journalists have funded their reportage via public donations.

Dispersed journalism – 10/100/1000 people can cover more geographical space.

CJ’s can offer their services to someone who has an interest/lead on a story -

Specific skillsets could be listed so that CJ’s can ask for/offer their services more specifically: legal/scientific/cultural expertise could be applied when needed

Ad-hoc groups could form & reform as an investigation continues  – facts could be checked by more than one person, to prevent misunderstanding/malpractice.

Could there be Guilds/Clans of similarly skilled/interested CJ’s?

Where is a story published once it reaches critical mass?

- on the lead journo’s blog?

- on the hub site?

- in a newspaper/magazine that has commissioned or been offered the piece?

Will the idea of “the paper of record”  disappear, evolve, or be transformed into something else?

*The attention of CJ’s could be focussed on struggling/demanding/underfunded neighborhoods – they have as many stories to be told about them, but are mostly ignored as mainstream journalists don’t live there. Telling these stories could help bring about change.

McSweeney’s revitalised short story publishing in the US – what will do the same for investigative reporting?

[all of this inspired by Clay Shirky's talk on the cognitive surplus]

* Moore, Charles. Daniel H. Burnham, Architect, Planner of Cities

Things are swooping merrily along here though.