[This post features a really good list of smartphone apps for photos, photo editing, video, audio, recording calls, writing and social network tools. Useful for PR, journalists or anyone producing content and stories. ~ Jeff]
Via Rusty Cawley, APR
Join Scoop.it for Free
Share ideas that matter on the social web and experience
the benefits of curating the world's best content.
I don't have a Facebook, a Twitter or a LinkedIn account
Already have an account: Login
SIGN UP
Attract your communities of interest by sharing ideas that matter
Scoop.it Score
87
Visitors
Loading...
Updated
Today
Created
Aug 21, 2011
Created by
Scoops
5984
Reactions
23209
Edit Tag
Follow
|
Rescooped by Jeff Domansky from The Content Journalist on Scoop.It onto Public Relations & Social Media Insight |
Scoop.it!
Via Rusty Cawley, APR
No comment yet.
Sign up to comment
Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
No
 Your new post is loading...
Scoop.it!
Everybody multitasks, but what most people don’t realize is that, in fact, multitasking doesn’t work. Studies show that only about 2% of people are capable of effectively multitasking, but that doesn’t stop the remaining 98% of people from trying. And with today’s technology, everyone multitasks more than ever—from using smartphones in class to tablets while watching television, there are always multiple things to be doing at one time.
While multitasking may make you feel like you’re accomplishing more things in less time, in actuality trying to multitask does more harm than good: It reduces productivity, and even lowers your IQ. Things like texting while studying or watching TV while working on a paper can have a huge effect on your academic success, so next time you’re tempted to multitask while doing schoolwork, remember that if you really want to get something done right, multitasking is probably not your best route....
[Geez, I guess Mom was right. Pay attention! - JD] Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
No
Scoop.it!
The Web as we know it today was two years old in June 1997, when the page below went up. It lasted, according to Archive.org, until October 2010. When I ran across it back then, it blew my mind — especially the passage I have boldfaced in the long paragraph near the end.
The Internet is a table for two. Any two, anywhere. All attempts to restrict it and lock it down will fail to alter the base fact that the Net’s protocols are designed to eliminate the functional distance, as far as possible, between any two points, any two devices, any two people. This is the design principle for a World of Ends. That last link goes to a piece David Weinberger and I wrote in 2003, to as little effect, I suspect, as @Man’s piece had in 1997. I doubt any of the three of us would write the same things the same ways today. But the base principle, that table-for-two-ness, is something I believe all of us respect. It won’t go away. That’s why I thought it best to disinter @Man’s original and run it again here....
[Always thought-provoking Doc Searls - JD] Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
No
|
Scoop.it!
I think every writer, every journalist, every scholar, should tell you where he’s coming from before he tells you what he knows. I am not a science journalist, or a science blogger, or a scientist who writes. But I am interested in your world, and I try to follow developments in it. My field of study is what I call “pressthink,” which is sort of like groupthink– but for people in journalism. Lately I have been fixated on the problems of the press as it tries to adapt to the digital world. So that’s what I do. But it’s not where I’m coming from....
And that’s what I have for you today: a really juicy puzzle. It begins with a distinction that I have found useful. The distinction is between tame and wicked problems. Now given what’s happened to science writer Jonah Lehrer lately I should tell you that I’ve written about this issue before and since I said it about as well as I could say it then, I am going to say it in a similar way again… okay?...
Wicked problems have these features: It is hard to say what the problem is, to define it clearly or to tell where it stops and starts. There is no “right” way to view the problem, no definitive formulation. There are many stakeholders, all with their own frames, which they tend to see as exclusively correct. Ask what the problem is and you will get a different answer from each. Someone can always say that the problem is just a symptom of another problem and that someone will not be wrong. The problem is inter-connected to a lot of other problems; pulling them apart is almost impossible. In a word: it’s a mess....
[Jay Rosen tackles "wicked problems" delightfully - JD ] Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
No
|
