Delivering news, historically, has always been vital to society. The way of doing that for the past hundred and fifty years or so was mainly the newspaper. With the advent of the internet, that is changing quite rapidly.
Online news is something very similar, yet very different to the format of a newspaper. Take the New York Times, for example. Their internet site is laid out much like a newspaper might be: main headlines, a large picture, and many blurbs about stories on the main page before delving in to find out more. This is one of the few- news websites like cnn, fox, msnbc, etc. all use layouts that are unique to the internet.
Because the internet can be updated anytime, anywhere, and by pretty much anyone, a new form of news has developed. "iReporting," which can a great example of can be found here, is growing leaps in bounds as far as internet news is concerned. Ordinary people like you and I can report anything we think is newsworthy and upload it for others to see. This is a growing trend, and one that I believe undermines journalistic credibility.
"Reporters" who may not know the first thing about journalism simply report something, say what they think about it, and upload it. This does not allow for all the facts (from each side) to be reported, certain styles, etc. It's a crap shoot.
This ease of reporting news and the lack of regard for professional journalism (iReporting) are one of the many factors contributing to the downfall of the professional, journalistic craft that is a newspaper.
-Nelson Sederstrom
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
At first, iReporting seems like a refreshing idea, allowing the average blue-collar American to share their views for the world to hear. iReporting, however, often has no real news content according to the news values mentioned by Stovall. Take for example this iReporting story available on CNN.com (http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-350692). Personally, I find no news in this one minute and twenty-six second clip. It is simple a man with a puppet talking to himself. There is no issue of prominence, timeliness, or even bizarre circumstances (excluding the fact that this man owns a Sesame Street-esque puppet.) Although there is no substantial news content in this clip, it is still displayed on the iReporting homepage. Is a blank story such as this really what American citizens want? Is this how we are contributing to society?
ReplyDeleteStories from citizen journalists can contain alternative content that cannot be found in traditional daily newspapers, but the content is often empty and without credible source. The average citizen does not have access to political figures or prominent businesspersons, which makes gaining credible sources difficult. In Silverblatt's article on media literacy he states that journalists rely on a web of sources to create their news stories. Citizen journalists and iReporters do not have the same resources as professionl journalists, and their research may be limited to just a Google search. As we all know, Google searches do not always bring back correct information. Therefor citizen journalists can create stories on little to no evidence. Another blogger can use their false or fabricated information to create a story of their own, creating a snowball effect of misinformation.
Similarly, bloggers and citizen journalists are not required to have any sources at all. Although newspaper reporting is not perfect, journalists are at least required by their editors to have credible sources for all claims before a story can be published. A citizen journalist is able to create any story and sensationalize it as much as they want to market their own ideas. If facts are available to strengthen their arguments, then they may be used. If facts detract from their argument, however, facts and proof of their claims can be omitted. They do not have to be held accountable for their stories, and they therefore do not need to have any proof to their articles. Take for example this article (http://www.journalism.co.uk/2/articles/5998.pph) that points out the lack of credibility in a popular blog. The Drudge Report has broken some stories, but some of their stories lack sufficient proof of claims. Because the readers of the Drudge Report are getting what they want, their desire for factual news declines.
Although blogging and iReporting might give citizens what they want, what is wanted is not always what is best. Stories from CNN's iReporting might seem refreshing, but they often lack the news values and objectivity of traditional newspaper stories. Blogs such as the Drudge Report reinforce our own beliefs, but does that promote a healthy democracy? Is limiting ourselves to a few blogs a healthy way to receive news when we are only receiving what we feel like knowing? In a traditional newspaper, readers are subjected to a variety of stories from a variety of perspectives. iReporting and politically extreme bloggers present citizens with a one-sided view of the world. Citizens need to be subjected to multiple perspectives to better understand situations. A healthy democracy cannot consists of close-minded individuals who only read what is pleasing and convenient. Although reading every story in a newspaper may seem tiresome, it's not possible to be an active citizen if one is not aware of what is going on outside the blogosphere.