Is open news quality news?
There are problems with news that has no proof of production. This blog will deal with two main problems. The first, as mentioned in the text, is that there is no control over the value over the news put forward. Something that is newsworthy to one person will be irrelevant to another. This will inevitably result in a large number of news stories “One issue was the large number of items being posted to sites, which meant that even especially well-researched or significant stories would be replaced quickly on the front page” (Meikle 2003). The second is the verity of the news being put forward. Newspapers and television news have a strict editing process but the internet allows for many rumours and myths to appear like fact and stories that haven’t been properly investigated into or which have bias, opinionated slants. Although you do get a huge range of news from different sources, and learn things that you may not have got from other informers. This opens up a range of opportunity for learning, but the quality of this news cannot be established (although there is obviously dispute over the quality of television and newspaper news as well)
Are there ‘new kinds of journalist’ online? If so, how so?
In ‘new’ media terms, anyone can be a news journalist. According to the text, blogs and newsgroups are considered news. The ramblings of a self-important daily blogger who regards their breakfast habits as interesting can be thought of as news. This opens up the news to anybody which will have some advantages, such as the vastness of niche news that is relevant to you, and readily available news, however, this could swamp the internet with news that is irrelevant to the masses.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Also intersting points. But the "real" journalist is evolving too - those news reporters who used to file their daily or weekly report are expected/encouraged to run a blog too - this raises all sorts of isseus to do with how much time they have left over to research. But this question of "what is news?" reminds me of that other battle for "quality" - the argument about "what is art?". There are similarities too - in terms of what we call quality, reality, its purpose.....
ReplyDeleteAnd you are right (bracketed or not) to mention that the conventional press has its own problems. So a question: where do they get their information from?