I am at a serious story and have to post on social media. How can I avoid seeming insensitive?

Social Awareness Comments Off on I am at a serious story and have to post on social media. How can I avoid seeming insensitive?
Dec 162018

 

If you read industry blogs, you have seen plenty of cases of reporters tweeting a smiling face at a murder scene, natural disaster or some other similarly toned story. Facebook postings about meeting the national correspondent hero and taking a selfie get plenty of critiques too. This occurs often enough that one has to ask why? Why do so many continue making this mistake? 

The answer is two fold. First, many think in order to show they are at a scene, they have to show themselves in that scene. Second, like it or not, many journalists become rather immune to the scenes around them. In a sense you become less sensitive while in the middle of the moment. Part of this is a survival tactic. The stories covered are often hard to take. This is a natural human reaction. But it is a part of the biz, that the viewer does not want or need to understand. If they do get a sense of it, it comes across as trivializing the story, its impact and the viewer.

Many stations provide little to no guidance on how to handle sensitive issues while on social media, even though you are required to post. So let’s create a checklist you can have on hand to help yourself navigate a tough situation when you are emotionally impacted, the deadlines are intense and you are trying to fulfill your obligations without a lot of time to stop and think.  

Before you post ask yourself:

Does a selfie help cover this story?

What is the tone of my coverage today?

How will this tweet/FB posting define my image as a journalist?

Yes, these questions are heavy. That’s why we are going to look at how to answer each one before you are at a serious story. If you know how to quickly gage the answers then this list is a simple reminder that could keep you from making a big mistake that hurts credibility. 

Let’s tackle the first question. Does a selfie help cover the story? Why do you want to put yourself into the image in the first place? Again, we are focusing on a serious story. Did you just meet the hero who saved the day? Do you want an image of you talking with that person? Did you just get an exclusive look at an element? Do you want to show yourself getting a tour of the crime scene for example? A look at the fire line? Then ask, is the image as effective if you show just that hero, or just that fire line and you are not in the image at all?  Again, a lot of reporters innately think they have to show that they are on the story to really be on the story. But I am going to ask you to consider a social media selfie the way you should consider the use of a standup. If there is a way to let the story tell itself with images alone, then you do not need to be part of it. If you are describing something, pointing something out or connecting two things and your physical presence adds to understanding, then having you in the shot is appropriate. But that doesn’t mean a selfie. Have the photographer you are working with take a pic of you talking to the subject or being given that tour of the scene. If you are an MMJ, consider asking someone you trust to snap it for you. If you must show yourself at a scene, it should be a shot that shows you actively engaged in covering the story. When is the last time you saw a network 2-shot with the correspondent and the interview subject standing side-by-side, grinning? Selfies send a very different tone when you really think about it.

Speaking of… What is the tone of my coverage today? Often the answer to this is going to rule out selfies. If the tone is to show the intensity of the shooting scene, how does a selfie convey that intensity appropriately? If the post celebrates a rescue in flood waters, what will your physical presence do to make that more clear in a still shot?  

Then there is a question of your legacy. That might sound corny, but it is true. Really every FB post, serious story or not, applies. The industry is small. It can be ruthless. You do not want to be the subject of this comment: “Wait that person looks familiar. Oh, that’s the genius who smiled at the mass murder scene.” Every post, every tweet, every Instagram image has to portray you as the type of journalist you want to be. That is hard. You will not get every posting right. But you want to avoid major gaffes. Especially when covering a serious story. The two questions above should help you, so that by the time you get to this question your gut knows what to do.

If you get to a large scale story and meet your mentor, take a picture with the person if there’s down time. Just don’t post it. It really only matters to you anyway. Why take the risk of putting it on your work accounts, and have some think you are insensitive? In terms of your private account, just remember no account is truly private when you are a journalist. Check your privacy settings and know you could still take some risk. 

Bottom line, serious stories are hard enough to cover in a Tweet, Facebook post, or Instagram image. Unless your presence in the shot is really crucial for the viewer to understand the story, the best option is to avoid a selfie. The fact that you are posting is enough to show you are there. You have to do all you can to protect your credibility. Selfie’s often just are not worth it while on a serious story. Better to go conservative, and decrease your risk of seeming insensitive. Now am I saying never do a selfie? No. But this article is about serious stories. Stories that stir intense emotions of sadness, fear, anger, pain or frustration. Happy stories, inspiring stories and some stories discussing challenges could open the door to selfies. The litmus test above will help you know when. 

Are Facts The “New” TV Stars? Thank Millennials.

Social Awareness Comments Off on Are Facts The “New” TV Stars? Thank Millennials.
Nov 292017

In the past two weeks, the TV news industry has taken a very bold stand. The fact that both Charlie Rose and Matt Lauer where fired over sexual harassment allegations is huge. Many old timers are shocked that it was not just swept under the rug or they were told, “Hey just don’t do it again (wink wink).” But I am going to argue that these firings are not necessarily a symbol that harassment is no longer acceptable in the workplace. Instead I am going to say this: Content managers just got a lot more power. Use it wisely.

NBC and CBS did not do this completely to be PC. While these moves are bold and could represent big profit losses short term, I think they’ve banked on a trend that’s been building for awhile. The audience they need to reach wants facts. The content is becoming more important than the person delivering it.

We’ve seen this coming for awhile. But the slow trend just sped up. TV news is refocusing on strong content generators, not just pretty faces. This is key to understand for a couple of reasons. First if you just like being on TV and could care less about what you read and report, your career may be a lot shorter than if you started 10 years ago. Secondly, producers and managers can finally start demanding more money because they have more of a clear cut impact on the success of a newscast. NBC would not have put the entire Today Show brand in jeopardy if it felt the show was being led by a bunch of morons. That’s the simple truth. NBC obviously has confidence in the content leaders on staff at Today to put together compelling shows that will continue to draw audience. Same with CBS and it’s rising star CBS This Morning.

I have said this before and will say it again. In order to gain millennials as fans and viewers you need to stop talking down to them. You need to stop focusing on just the “look” of the newscast. Millennials want substance. Tell me something I don’t already know or don’t waste my time. That phrase should be printed out and placed on top of your computer screen if you are a journalist. And this should be your other mantra: be right or don’t do it at all. NBC and CBS also just showed that they think they have diversified enough they do not have to depend on newscasts being their main profit generators long term. Otherwise Charlie and Matt would have been reprimanded only. When there was a risk reward analysis both were considered expendable. That is shocking for industry old timers. We watched these types of “icons” literally play god in newsrooms across the country. They could do and say whatever and it was allowed. Not anymore and that’s because the audience has sent a message. Facts are more important than messengers.

If TV news wants to stay relevant and profitable, it is time to focus on good journalism. Get to the root of why there were newscasts in the first place. Tell me something I don’t already know or don’t waste my time. Its time to demand that managers, producers and writers are paid better. The trend toward bulking up investigative units will continue in 2018. If you love “doing good journalism” now is the time to shine. And you just might save the industry to boot. Thank you millennials for demanding to know more. And please TV news industry leaders, wake up and realize millennials don’t like stupid gimmicks. Give them more credit. Provide the facts, spell out details and give options to learn even more. You heard some of the message. These two firings are proof. Now be brave and act. Truly make the facts the stars of TV news again.

 

Is TV news actually social media savvy?

Social Awareness Comments Off on Is TV news actually social media savvy?
Apr 212017

I promise “Survive” is going to remain a website primarily focused on practical advice articles to help you get through your work day more easily. But occasionally, we feel the need to post an article meant to get the industry to stop, think and hopefully openly talk about important issues in newsrooms today. After all, that’s crucial to survive in TV news as well.

Over the last 5 years, “Survive” has watched as TV stations grappled with how to connect with viewers now more focused on digital news than TV. And after 5 years of watching, talking to key decision makers and digital users, a very important question needs to be asked: “Is TV news actually social media savvy?” Such a simple question, but a very complex answer.

I’m going to make the argument that TV News is not very social media savvy. Here’s why. It’s not truly understanding the nuances of why people use social media. We all know that social media is a connector. It helps people express themselves and find others who agree and disagree with what they say and do. But here’s the rub. Even though it seems like social media focuses on superficial things like the actual color of a dress, whether you’ve been to a new restaurant yet, makeup tips and GIFs, this is really scratching the surface. Trending topics and video going viral, while exciting and EASY to capitalize on, are just a small part of the power of the digital world. At its core, internet surfing and social media interaction have basic human desires behind them. Finding information. Understanding why.

Really stop and think about what you do on the internet. It helps me that I have super curious kids. Here are the last three searches my family did: Why is Easter Island called Easter Island? Why do you need fractions? Why are some metals harder to melt than others? Typical kid questions right? Now think about your latest searches. Some topics might be: Why is my insurance going up? Why did I pay more in taxes this year? What does (insert word) mean? And of course, a list of symptoms to see what illness you might have. You search up doctors to see if they get good reviews. You search to see if your home values stayed the same year to year. You check your bank balance. You check when your favorite band is coming to town. What’s on sale this week at the grocery store? And you also shop. All of that in addition to hitting your favorite news sites.

When you go on social media you want to see how your friends are doing and wait for it… what is happening in the world. I venture to guess that many of you look at what’s trending, get a chuckle out of some of it, then start looking for information other ways. Notice I used the word information. That’s intentional. Social media savvy viewers like INFORMATION.

I think the TV industry is marginalizing younger audiences. Yes, that’s a bold statement and I mean it. They think the average 20-to-38 year old just wants to watch crazy videos about the rat carrying pizza and near escapes. They only want to see selfies. What if that’s only a small fraction of what this mysterious new audience is looking at? What if they are also searching up all kinds of INFORMATION, looking to understand why things are happening the way they are? I get asked all the time by younger journalists, “Why does my boss think I only care about selfies?” “Why can’t they see that social media helps uncover what people really want to know about and cannot figure out the answer to?” I have viewers say to me all the time, “Why does TV news think I am stupid?” “Where can I get actual information about what’s happening?”

Now I can hear the nay sayers pointing out that hyper local news sites do ok for awhile then fizzle. I am going to counter with this. Maybe they weren’t actually listening to what people want to know, instead they were telling them what they should want to know. I recently started using the Nextdoor app. I can easily pitch 2 stories a week out of those discussion boards, that could hit broader audiences. And that’s by casually glancing. Some of the stories are obvious, but some of the discussions are a little surprising. And great topics for debate. Social media loves a good debate. You get to exchange INFORMATION. You get to try and discredit information too. Critical thinking.

What if digital tie-ins looked more like what happens on a typical tablet while watching TV. By TV I mean more than news. You’re watching a show. “Wait that actress looks familiar.” With a quick google search you find out who it is while still watching the show. Think of the shows with the pop-up facts. This scene actually took 10 takes to get right. I actually had the flu when we climbed this mountain. Extra INFORMATION.

The most digitally savvy journalist I personally know, attempts to add social media elements that contain tangible information to big stories. Factoids that make you want to delve even deeper into the topic, most often the why. Why did it get this way? Why is that the next step? Why did that happen? Then this journalist adds elements that are connectors. (Remember the other big reason why people get on FB each night.) Not cheesy “do you agree” throwaway pitches. Actual exchanges between people on social media.

I just have to say that simply deciding that you will look at the stories trending and make them the lead is not digitally savvy. It is an easy way out. Like the rip and read days. It will fail. It makes you look superficial and like you think the viewer is stupid. Do not under estimate the viewer who frankly is going digital to get information you are not providing. Do not give up on them either. Provide more information, in more accessible ways. Delve into the why in your digital elements. Give them a reason to want to connect to the story both on their tablets and on their big screens with great visuals and character development. These are just a few suggestions. But whatever you do, start with this thought: How can we give them more information? Not how can we manipulate them into watching? If you are into trending topics, you already saw it. That’s not NEWs. And frankly the audience hopes you are clued in enough to know it’s there. You do not have to prove you get them. Give them more of what they want:  Information and ways to connect the dots. Many are way more analytical than you are giving them credit for being. For far too long, editorial meetings have been centered around what a group of people think the audience should know, based of those decision makers own personal interests and biases. Now you have powerful tools to see what they actually want to know, and what they are struggling to find out. Serve that. Then TV news might prove itself digitally savvy after all.

Can't See It? Then Tweet It!

Know Your Newsroom, Reporting, Social Awareness Comments Off on Can’t See It? Then Tweet It!
Oct 212015

By now you’ve probably heard about the big story this week. It was an embarrassing gaffe during a live shot about the Michigan and Michigan State football game. It was a game decided on the final play. The on-scene reporter went TV and said the wrong team won. The anchor then had to correct the mistake when the reporter tossed back to the studio.

In this FTVLIVE article the sports anchor is quoted as writing on Facebook that “we tried bringing the most up to date stats as we could as we were going live at the exact moment everything was happening. Had two scripts written and ready to go and got bad information off my phone while on air. And then we immediately corrected it when we could. I’m sorry for getting it wrong but in the end it was corrected and it certainly won’t be a finish forgotten by any of us.”

Now if you have worked in TV news and covered a live event, especially a sports event even once, you know that it can be very hard to get the right information on the air in the final minutes of a newscast. Frankly, I am shocked this kind of gaffe doesn’t happen more often. The biggest reason why is the reporter has to leave the event in order to go live. That’s generally because of where you have to park the live truck and coverage rights, since the live event itself is televised.

So how can the reporter know what is happening when he/she doesn’t have eyes on the event?
There are several ways to prevent this, the biggest being putting someone in the stadium, who has news sense and can let the reporter know. But based on the description of how it went down quoted above, they may have attempted this solution. Guessing whoever was on the phone, or whatever site was used, will not be part of the equation next time.

This gaffe does open up discussion for an even bigger issue, and that is the need to be first, even at great risk of being wrong. This particular flub is making all sorts of rounds because it seems like such an obvious mistake. How could the reporter not know? How could you miss something when you are at the event? Look at his live shot background. He had huge stadium walls separating him. A big part of the blame here, lies with the decision on how to execute bringing the latest about the game to the newscast audience.

There is an age old argument that the people who really give a rip about the game or sporting event you are at, are actually watching it. So the push to be first is irrelevant because the audience that cares is not watching you, they are watching the game. But there is a strong counterpoint that this is a huge event everyone will be talking about in the DMA and you simply cannot ignore it. So here’s where I am going to get bold and ask, why not go non traditional? Why not keep the reporter in the stands, so your eyewitness actually knows what happened? Can you show a live pic, in the place where crews are allowed to be (even if that’s outside the stadium) and mention that your reporter is there, and live tweeting about the event? Can you show tweets fullscreen from your crew in the stands to show that you are all over the coverage? Here’s why this is a win-win scenario: The people watching the game, may still engage with your sports reporter on the scene through social media. The reporter can focus on the experience of the game for those who could not go for TV and tweet about the event with no worries about missing a key play. So the reporter can turn a piece on how much the fans are loving the event, or something controversial that happened earlier that airs in the newscast, then tweet about the here and now in the final minutes of the game. Put the tweets up, put up a live pic and keep your information accurate. It hits more audience because he can even be interacting with people who are still at the game.

The problem TV stations face is how to disseminate information in this digital age. Most stations still want all the biggest information to be on TV first. That means we have to take a crew live at the event. This is sometimes a mistake. You are limiting your possibilities and increasing the risk of an embarrassing mistake like this one at the Michigan/Michigan State game. In the case of live sports events, live shots need to be more about the atmosphere, and eyewitness accounts of what is happening. Relevant facts are already being posted online. I am not saying ignore the facts, but don’t force someone into the situation this reporter was in. The odds were stacked against him. He was OUTSIDE the event with no way to personally witness what was happening. How can he realistically report on what was happening? If you go the social media emphasis route, he could be in the stadium bringing information in a relevant way through Facebook, Twitter and the station website. He could post to these outlets without having to leave the stadium. In order to serve the live newscast audience, remember, the viewers are likely casual fans, they are not watching the game. Do a pkg on the experience and then use graphics of the tweets to update the facts. The biggest payoff is that you serve multiple audiences and are emphasizing what each cares about in the way you are covering the event. TV news is not just about showing up and covering an event anymore. Now the focus has to be on how to do it, and include social media in a relevant way. The reporter being on scene showcases that the station understands this is a big event for the community. Showing what it’s been like at the game in a package, serves the casual sports-viewing audience. Tweeting and posting Facebook updates on the game itself, in real time helps your reporter directly engage with the audience in real time, thus making a connection. Showcasing that he is doing so throughout the newscast generates curiosity and a chance to engage with the reporter if you cannot be there yourself. This is effective even if the person is watching the event live on another channel. It is another way to be a relevant eyewitness and get more of the audience actively involved with your reporter who’s at the event.

Again, you have to look at the regulations for covering these sporting events. Some events prohibit live tweeting. Most of the time mentioning a Tweet works and is still compelling. Especially because the photographer with the live picture would then understand why some fans were walking out looking devastated. The whole scene, inside the stadium and out would have had relevant perspective. As TV stations cover a variety of live events, the bottom line is that they need to discuss how they will engage with the viewers actively. Simply showing up and reporting what you hope is first and right, is not enough anymore. Your viewers use social media to track events, they expect you to as well.

ON PERMANENT RECORD: Social Media Survival Guide

Social Awareness Comments Off on ON PERMANENT RECORD: Social Media Survival Guide
Jun 182015

In the last few weeks there has been what seems an unusually high number of social media gaffes by journalists. Survive has focused a lot of attention on trying to help journalists avoid this public and frankly permanent record of embarrassment.  It appears it is time for another round of discussion about this. So let’s dive in to the recurring pitfalls that make journalists look bad on social media, and ways to avoid them.

Top Danger Zones

Selfie backgrounds and tone
Opinions
Responding to attacks
Teasing a story

The biggest potential pitfall without a doubt, is the background of a selfie and your tone describing it. Look, I get it. Selfies are the way to show where you are and what you are doing. And, yes, a lot of people just love seeing them. I understand that they are an important and effective way to communicate. In and of itself, the concept of a selfie is great. But not when you end up smiling at murder scenes, fatal accidents and just after weather events. The key here is to literally take a step back, and think about your background image. Even if a viewer cannot see the burning house, the crime tape or the tornado damage, the time of day and location of your selfie will out you. We have to remember as journalists that although reporters and anchors are instrumental in telling stories, viewers tune in for the facts and relatable information in the story even more. It is the simple truth. That includes your social media page. They follow you because they like how you share information with them. You and information. Not just you. You are still a stranger. Someone they like to spy on in a way, and seethings vicariously through.. but still a stranger. So you cannot expect the viewer to know your intention by sending a selfie out from a crime scene. And while we are at it headed to a crime scene, murder trial or fire. You come across as harsh, insensitive and frankly narcissistic. I do believe many journalists making these mistakes have good intentions. They want to show they are on a story and think of selfies because they are a natural part of everyday interactions with fans and friends. I think these journalists are often trying to show that they are on a big story and are eager to bring viewers all the information they can. A camera means smile, so they smile out of habit. But remember, viewers do not routinely “hang out” at crime scenes. Many live in gripping fear of large, destructive, weather events. Viewers follow you for information. Selfies for journalists, should not happen on the scene or headed to or from the scene of a story that is serious and/or tragic in nature. It really is that simple. When taking a selfie, stop to consider where you are or are headed to first. If it is serious in nature stick to images of the scene. Keep your selfie out of it.

Lets get more into the idea of the tone of your message. Remember, viewers follow your social media accounts in order to gain information. So, every time you express an opinion, you could be stepping into another dangerous pitfall. FTVLive recently exposed two cases of tweets that came across as very insensitive. A journalist excited at the possibility of covering her first hurricane, and another journalist calling out a “beggar” who seems to always be in the same area looking for a handout.

Both of these tweets express opinions. I am guessing both merely wanted to get a conversation going and hoped to be relatable to followers on Twitter. The problem is, opinions are a very slippery slope. Especially for journalists who are supposed to be objective in their professional lives. Even commenting on sports can be tricky, if you happen to root for a main rival team from the city/state where you work. Seriously. It can cause a backlash. An ND recently told me about a weekend anchor who said he hoped a rival team wins next week against the state team in a huge SEC football town. He got so many complaints about that anchor’s comments he debated firing the anchor to “keep the peace.”  You can talk to your friends and family about your opinions regarding news stories and issues. But don’t plaster them all over social media. Opinions like “I had a great run today.” and “I love drinking coffee.” are fine. Those sorts of comments will likely not create a heated response. But bottom line, social media is full of people who like to start fights. And journalists are a great target especially if they share opinions on things they are supposed to be objective about.

This leads to the third common pitfall, responding to critics. We have addressed this issue before, but it deserves going over again.  There are many wonderful people on social media. There also are a lot of trouble makers who want to incite public figures. On-air talent: On social media, because of your job, you are a public figure. Producers: You are too in many ways. You can be a target for people with an axe to grind against your station, your community or people who they deem to have public influence. Recently a meteorologist in DC shot back at someone on Twitter. He took heat for it too. Another meteorologist in Orlando recently blogged how hard it can be to deal with bullies.

To summarize, in simple terms, think of this analogy: It’s rarely the person who throws the first punch who gets caught and punished. It’s normally the second person. As maddening as it is, you have to take the higher ground. Period. If the bully is exceptionally nasty, let management know. Your safety is critical. These attacks, while totally uncalled for, can do you more harm if you respond with an attack, than if you ignore them. These bullies just do not deserve to get the best of you.
And now the last danger zone. Teases.  Remember that half the burden is gone for you on social media. You are not begging viewers to stay. They are actively seeking you out. Lately there have been several incidents where the “tease writer” on the social media account showed a scene from the station, and it looked insensitive.  I think part of the problem is social media writers are given mandates and try and force a square peg into a round hole. Yes, it can be very good to show “behind the scenes” crews working for you images. But again, think tone. This simple rule can once again help you avoid gaffes. If the story is serious in nature, leave the journalists image out of it. Focus on the scene. Focus on the impact, not the instrument providing the information. Also, a quick reminder. You do not have to make a story relatable by comparing it to a hit show or attempting to be witty. The characters and reason you are covering the story should be enough of a draw.

News organizations are trying to come up with basic guidelines, as a result of so many blunders on social media. The biggest battle all agree is the common thinking it’s only Twitter. Or it’s only Facebook. But unlike TV where we old timers like to say, “now it’s out in the universe” after a show airs, social media is permanent. There are ways to find even the comments you delete. Once you put a Tweet or FB or Instagram post out there, it is always out there for better or worse. It is crucial to understand the comments can and will haunt. As we mentioned before your Twitter account says a lot about you.  You have to make sure it is a good message your parents, minister, rabbi and boss would want to be aligned with. Not just read, but be connected to permanently. So look for these common pitfalls and don’t fall for them. Your reputation is too important.

Mayhem Blogger

Social Awareness Comments Off on Mayhem Blogger
Jan 152015

The story is a great read.

And for journalists – true, capital-J-on-your-chest, I-can-recite-the-SPJ-Code-of-Ethics journalists – this is also terribly disheartening.

This is what we’re up against.

For better or worse, we can get our “news” from sources that go beyond the traditional (or “legacy,” as I like to call them) media outlets.

I am not ashamed to admit, I love me some Daily Show with John Stewart and what was the Colbert Report. First of all, their archive and research department is insane. As a former investigative and data reporter, the number of clips they dig up that add context and show patterns of (in)consistency makes me drool. Second, under the guise of satire, there’s a whole heck of a lot of fact. The hosts (“anchors”) and correspondents (“reporters”) can add perspectives (opinions?) true by-the-book unbiased journalists can’t.

But when, as in the case of Charles C. Johnson, news consumers are treated to false information, and flat-out lies – without correction, without remorse – all for clicks and notoriety, to say it’s frustrating is an understatement.

I don’t know of any newsroom that is not asking its journalists to do more with less. All while multiple deadlines across platforms with diminishing resources (and salaries) loom daily.

For longevity, it’s not longer sufficient to simply do a darn good job – you must “build a brand.”

Who is to blame? Technology – for giving us more outlets from which to get information? Consumers – who don’t take the time to check the credibility of their “media” outlets? Managers – who demand clicks and name recognition over enterprise and solid reporting? Media companies – bleeding money, desperately seeking revenue? “Journalists” – who’d rather take selfies on scene and post flashy hashtags than report?

None, some and all are probably the correct answers. And here is where I channel my inner cheerleader: to you true journalists, don’t let this stop you from doing your due diligence!
Persevere! Credibility is key. Journalism isn’t just a job – it’s a calling.

This blogger – and others more interested in exposing their brand and notoriety – may become recognizable. And eventually, so will his factual errors and seemingly callous attitude towards the damage they’ve caused.

If you wanna be famous – go on reality tv. Hire an agent. Hire a stylist. Hire a good plastic surgeon and make up artist. Marry – divorce – someone famous.

And I beg of you, please stay out of the way of us JOURNALISTS so we can continue to hold the powerful accountable. Give voice to the voiceless. Inform, enlighten and compel viewers, surfers, and readers.

———————————————————————————————————————–

Victoria Lim is a multi-platform journalism pioneer, newsroom trainer and educator; Frappacino fan and chocoholic. You can reach her @VictoriaLim on Twitter.
Facebook: Facebook.com/VictoriaLimReports
Website: www.victorialim.com

Bad Behavior has blocked 999 access attempts in the last 7 days.