Diaspora, a new open-source social network, is addressing these issues. Conceived in the summer of 2010 and developed by a group of four New York University students — Daniel Grippi, Maxwell Salzberg, Ilya Zhitomirskiy, and Raphael Sofaer — it’s self-deemed as “Diaspora: the privacy aware, personally controlled, do-it-all distributed open source social network.” It is designed to give the control of personal information to the individual users without the subjection of third-party sell out or privacy policy adjustment. Disapora allows people to do similar activities as Facebook — uploading photos and videos, posting comments, searching for friends.

Screenshot of the main page

In early 2010, the group of four entrepreneurs publicly requested financial support via the online fundraising platform Kickstarter with an initial goal of raising $10,000 by early June in order to start programming. In less than 2 weeks of posting the request, they raised over $100,000. By mid-May, they had 4,800 backers and a total pledge of $175,000, with figures continually growing. The group worked throughout the summer on developing the alpha version.

In mid-September, the group released the source code for developers and more recently began giving out invites for alpha-version use.

It’s still a bit early to really determine whether or not Diaspora will gain enough users to make it a true Facebook rival and rise as a top social networking website. It has exhibited tremendous support, as many people — much to the chagrin of Zuckerberg — actually value their privacy. Of course, though, the uproar about Facebook’s lack of regard for personal privacy could easily blow over; people may not be happy but people may also not care enough or be too lazy enough to switch over. This is perhaps Diaspora’s biggest challenge and will truly impact whether or not the new network will garner a large enough population for its membership.

However, as the web continues to rapidly evolve and privacy concerns continue to be a major issue for online users, and if Diaspora continues to maintain its pledge to protect the personal information that people value, then it just might have a fighting chance against the behemoth Facebook.

Below is a walk-through in pictures fromhttp://zdnet.com:

The first page you’ll see in setting up — very basic, just inputting information.

You can create “aspects” (or categories) and add your friends and acquaintances to them.

Start the conversation — equivalent to your wall (status updates, uploads, comments, etc.)

Photo upload — I agree with the comment that Diaspora is aesthetically pleasing.

This is what your home page may look like — posts from friends and information sharing.

(More pictures can be seen on Lifehacker.com as well.)

This past month or so has been a big month for platform launches (MakeSense, Jumo, CauseVox, etc) and trying to peruse them all has left me limited time in exploring Diaspora. But so far, it seems pretty navigable, with a clean and easy-to-use feel. There are small dissatisfactions here and there but that’s to be expected of any alpha version. It’ll be interesting to see what lies ahead for this new venture.

You can follow development progress and news updates on http://www.joindiaspora.com.

PS – If anyone would like an invite, just hit me up.

Are citizen journalists more agile than their professional counterparts, often breaking news before the big boys have had time to react?

The answer is quantitative and anecdotal rather than qualitative, and looks in part on how people use social tools such as Twitter and Facebook to report on the world around them. It also includes content produced for citizen journalism sites such as upstarts EveryBlock, Global Voices and Neighborhoodr as well as mainstream initiatives such as CNN’s iReport and AOL’s high profile Patch network of community news sites.

Social Web followers are familiar with the fact that the first image of US Airways Flight 1549 in the Hudson River appeared on Twitter; Facebook’s use by activists to report on protests in Moldova, Colombia, Venezuela and elsewhere; and Flickr, YouTube, Twitter and other social networks as prime channels for the world to learn what was happening in the streets after the contested 2009 Iranian elections.

More recently, Jose L. Leyva wrote about how citizens in Monterrey, Mexico are taking to social networks— and creating new ones — in order to document drug cartel violence.

Twitter, Facebook and other online forums have also become a primary source of information in a society in which self-censorship and anonymity have become one resort for journalists covering the drug war to avoid threats by cartels or harassment by Mexican authorities. Social media platforms have also become a place in which people eager know what’s going on the streets can get real-time information.

Interesting too are anecdotes given by Rachel Sterne, Founder and CEO of Ground Report, a global citizen journalism site launched in 2006. Speaking to us earlier this week, Rachel put her site head to head with the New York Times to demonstrate how her network of 9,000 reporters has broken news ranging from January 2008 suicide attacks in Peshawar to Albino killings in Tanzania.

While readily admitting that her network of reporters can’t compete with mainstream outlets like the Times on access and persistent, overall journalism quality, she does outline how citizen reporting such as that done on Ground Report brings entirely new perspectives and voices to the news cycle. In that way, she thinks publications like Ground Report can function as early warning systems in our future journalism environment.

This idea dovetails nicely with a conversation I had with Mitchell Stephens, Journalism Professor at NYU and author of A History of News, over the summer for the Future Journalism Project documentary I’m working on. At the time he said something counterintuitive that makes more sense as I’ve thought about it over time: Journalists, he said, have to get out of the news business.

By this he meant focussing less time on being a “reporter” telling the world about the daily events that are going on, and more time being a “journalist” contextualizing the significance of what is going on. In other words, in a social media landscape where we already know the who, what, where and when, journalists and news organizations need to harness their scarce resources on delivering the how and why.

Perhaps, as Rachel suggests, citizen journalism sites such as hers can increasingly fill the early warning reporting role. As she says in her presentation above, her contributors aren’t necessarily amateurs, they’re often journalists in their own countries or subject matter experts with deep knowledge of the specific verticals they’re writing about.

In Rachel’s screencast above, she talks about Ground Report, its founding, how it works and who it reaches. She also offers insight into the technical and sociological changes occurring across the the Social Media Landscape. The screencast and her slideshow are available for download below.

Download this Screencast

Right Click (CTRL-click on a Mac) to Download.

• Citizen Journalism & Ground Report with Rachel Sterne: Resolution: 720×450. Size: 93 MB. Format: QuickTime.
• Citizen Journalism & Ground Report with Rachel Sterne: Size: 12 MB. Format: PDF.

In this video from the Mashable & 92Y Social Good Summit, Hughes announces that he is launching a new network called Jumo to help people “find, follow and support” organizations doing work they believe in.

Hughes sees a significant link missing between members of the public with an interest in social change and the multitudes of organizations working on the ground. Based upon an individual’s interests, Jumo will suggest organizations that users may want to learn more about.

Since even those of us with the best of intentions find it difficult to keep up with organizations, Jumo seeks to streamline the process.  Once a user finds an organization to connect with, the “follow” function will allow him or her to receiving streaming updates about the organization.

Jumo puts a refreshing emphasis on fostering mutual and sustainable connections between like-minded people and organizations.  The hope is that instead of urgent calls for help in crisis, people will feel connected to organizations and offer financial support as part of an ongoing relationship.

However, is Jumo really the first network of its kind as Hughes would have us believe?  Sites like Change.org and Causes on Facebook already help people to find nonprofits working on a variety of issues.  It is yet to be seen what added value Jumo will bring to the social media for social good space.

While the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Summit is happening at UN Headquarters, the venue 50 blocks uptown will bring together over 150 prominent bloggers and journalists with a variety of experts in town for the Summit.  Bloggers will have unprecedented access to pick their brains and bring a truly collective voice to the debates around topics like poverty, hunger, HIV/AIDS, women’s health and climate change.  The Lounge will also facilitate live interviews via Skype with the women and men in suits downtown at UN Headquarters.

The best part is that the bloggers will be sharing their experiences and broadcasting live to the rest of us as it all happens.

That’s right, New Yorkers, you can beat the Midtown East gridlock right from your own laptop.

The Digital Media Lounge will certainly give those of us with an interest in the MDGs a unique peek into an important event.  However, its connection with Mashable also presents a new possibility.  The bloggers at the Lounge have the potential to expose a broader technologically inclined audience to the issues surrounding the MDGs and will perhaps inspire more people to leverage digital media and technology for social good.

When we talk about Internet and mobile communications, we should always keep in mind that in many parts of the world these technologies just don’t compute.

Take, for example, the video above from Liberia‘s capital Monrovia. Here, where per capita GDP is $215, newspapers are too expensive to buy and Internet access is something the majority only hear about.

How to share and spread information then? The Chalkboard Blog.

Each morning, Alfred Sirleaf combs through the day’s news and writes headlines and stories on a giant chalkboard. Then readers come to discuss, debate in this newly formed town square. Call it the world’s least likely, most popular blog.

What’s amazing though in this video is how Sirleaf discusses design and technology issues associated with the medium. It’s a conversation any news editor can appreciate.

A different video on this can be seen here.

Basic background: as bloggers stake out their microniches, and advertisers recognize that bloggers have become the influential people within that niche, they can flow the influencer some cash dollars to speak nice about them — or at least recommend them — to their audiences.

The FTC wants Bloggers to reveal the relationship and the spirit to promote transparency is commendable. How practical it is is another story. Here’s what I wrote to a Listserv I belong to:

I’m kind of ambivalent about the whole thing. I think transparency is a best business practice so advocate for it whether legally required or not.

But should it be legally required? Different question and I just don’t know. Our whole media environment is pretty murky.

I’m more concerned with CNN/Fox interviewing retired four-star generals that have undisclosed commercial interests with military contractors than I am a blogger with undisclosed ties to a gadget company.

Since who we are and what we do is only as reliable as our credibility, I think any organization, large or small, would/should sink if they don’t reveal their ties.

That said, here’s an article against the regulations.

As I looked into it, the FTC regulations focus specifically on Bloggers. In its view, Bloggers are different than other media entities (read: big media, or mainstream media) and therefore deserve special regulation (Note to Bloggers: You always wanted to be important, now you are).

Continuing with my Listserv conversation:

What’s a “blogger” anyway?

As the author points out, a blog is only a delivery mechanism, and one that is used by both pajama clad typists and established news organizations. So is it just “independent” media, ie, the lone blogger or three, that needs to disclose?

Since the FTC leaves out traditional media (newspaper, television, magazines, radio, tv), how is it decided who’s included. For example, David Pogue has known interests outside his blog at the NYT. Should the Times be required to run a disclaimer next to all his posts, and if not, why should SomeLittleSite.com have to.

Or, when does the lowly “blog” become a “legitimate” news site that is no longer covered by the regulation.

A trickier nut to crack is that companies have paid people to post positive reviews on product sites. The most well known, recent case being Belkin.

How would the FTC say something like that be handled?

Anyway, or either way, the issues are important. While infinite good information is found on the tubes, so too is infinite bad. Throw shysters into the mix and you can understand the desire to regulate against duplicity. I think though that it has to be all in or none at all.

If Fox/CNN don’t need to reveal commercial and political interests, neither do I.

Not that either is a good thing.