AP to dabble in Twitter crowdsourcing at Sotomayor hearing

And those questions will indeed be directed by the readers. As reported by Ian Crouch of Nieman Journalism Lab who asked Jim Kennedy, AP's vice president and director of strategic planning about the initiative, Kennedy insists that move is in an effort to "open up our coverage and engage users."

It looks as though the Associated Press is torn between becoming a sleek, hip Web 2.0 version or remaining the old fashioned, more traditional news agency, supplying content to its members. "We are looking to do things beyond writing stories, taking pictures, and shooting video. This big question here is: can a news agency have these kind of interactions even as it supplies content to our customers?" Kennedy stressed to Nieman Lab. His speculation is valid. He adds, "We are not using Twitter to break news...We want to point to the blog or point to our stories." In addition to the Twitter feeds, AP will be partnering up with Yahoo News blog offering real-time coverage from the hearings.

As for questions of monetization, it doesn't look like AP will be raking in the dough as a result of the partnership with Yahoo News, or vice versa. Mark Walker, the news aggregator's regional business leader says he would consider the partnership a success is readers are simply "more engaged."

Could referring to one's readership as "more engaged" be a protologistic term, subtly hinting that "more engaged" readers are more likely to pay up? If news agencies are catering to their readers, diligently responding to their queries, questions, comments and tips, it does not seem wholly unreasonable to ask for monetary donations. One citizen journalism site, Ohmynews, has asked its citizen journalists to willingly pay, which is one step away from erecting a paywall. After all, the privilege to dictate news content is akin to having a customized newsfeed catered to an individual's tastes and preferences.

Nevertheless, making money off of the hearings is not so much the cause for concern as much as the integrity and quality of the news that critics fear are at stake now that the AP has succombed to crowdsourcing. One negative reaction from in the comments section of the Nieman Lab article - which was a target of many defensive advocates of AP's decision to acknowledge its Twitterbase - reads, "Twittering at news events is such a waste of time. Just because something is new and different doesn't mean it's worth doing."
 
To those who frown upon the AP's decision to call on its readers for tips and interview questions, this could be the limit of AP's meddling with Twitter. It seems a long way before, if ever, the AP will appoint a "Twitter correspondent," as the SKY News has. Instead, a team member will be in charge of deciphering how, and to what degree reader interaction affected AP's coverage of Sotomayor's hearing. 

The reactions are mixed and the results are unpredictable. Consequently, no "benchmarks or fixed expectations" have been set. AP will keep tabs on visitors sourced from the real-time Yahoo blog as well as Twitter.