November 28, 2005

We The Media Chapter 12

"Blogs and other modern media are feedback systems. They
work in something close to real time and capture—in the best
sense of the word—the multitude of ideas and realities each of
us can offer. On the Internet, we are defined by what we know
and share. Now, for the first time in history, the feedback
system can be global and nearly instantaneous" (Gillmor 237).

I could not agree more Mr. Gillmor. I think that we do share ideas. I do like the idea of feedback. I believe that feedback is what makes us the writers that we are meant to be. How we take criticism of our ideas, creates stronger individuals. I admire that statement that Gillmor wrote there, and it will stick with me after I leave.

As for online news, I do have a respect for it. It has many good concepts to offer. However, it is still filled with many flaws, and for that, I am sticking with my newspaper. Surprisingly, I don't think that I am going to leave the blogosphere, because I think it does a lot of good, especially in the feedback category. Blogs seem to represent not only how we feel, but who we are. Let me elaborate. If I write something on a news story that I take to heart, it has now affected me personally, and it doesn't only reveal my feelings, it reveals my morals, my ideas, and my personal experiences with that topic. I think that is absolutely necessary for a person to grow.

At the same time, I think that Blogs are good for creating ideas and reflections academically as well. Creating analyses, syntheses, and other forms of 'es' lol is really good for bringing out scholarly ideas. I think that blogs are necessary in certain situations, as long as they are not pushed too hard. People should be able to blog at their own leisure (which they do TO AN EXTENT). I think that I will have better blogs when I am not pressured to do one as an assignment. Blogs are necessary in general for the creation of ideas.

But not news stories. Leave them to the newspapers, they get paid to do them, and they do their jobs particularly well. Do me a favor, and don't take the IANS book to heart. Anyone who creates arguments through card-stacking really is just out there to attack the other party. Journalists do solid work, and they work their hardest to make sure that stories are accurate and precise. Sometimes with time constraints, the story is not always great and riveting, but it is informational nonetheless.

That's it for me everybody. We The Media is a good book, and Gillmor has some very good points, but he just hasn't made a true believer out of me.

Posted by The Gentle Giant at November 28, 2005 06:33 PM

I disagree about the use of internet communications (obviously), but I think the feature that makes blogs a good candidate for newswriting is the ability to interact.

There is much more room for engagement of news--something invaluable because it gives room for follow-up questions and discussions the reporter never dreamed about.

Internet media give readers the chance to have a new voice. I don't necessarily think that all blogs should be taken at face value. Rather, I feel that we need to question and critically evaluate everything that comes before us.

With print media, we have become lazy in a sense that someone else filters the information for us and decides for us what is or isn't important. With the internet, we must decide what is or isn't important... what is or isn't accurate... what is or isn't fair.

Because the internet is interactive and holds a vast sea of information, we have a medium which is conducive to evaluation.

Evaluation is something we lack as a society from the modernist print age. We are used to having someone else do the evaluation for us. True, no one has an editor over their shoulders telling them what to write, but the community of the world-wide web is the editor.

I guess the reason blogs are gaining notoriety in newswriting is because the internet is teaching us to be skeptical again. (Think of the case where a blogger challenged Dan Rather).

With the obvious slant of newspapers today, this is a good lesson to learn. True, print journalists are good at what they do, but they are just human and prone to mistakes. Like the internet, we must be skeptical about print journalists. I wouldn't be so hasty to discredit It Ain't Necessarily So--its intention was not to attack journalists, but to nenew the lost skepticism of the general public.

Posted by: Evan at December 1, 2005 07:52 PM

I think that you bring up many good points Evan. I think that online journalism, as you have shown, produces many good qualities, and yes, print journalism has gotten lazier strictly to help their business.

Posted by: Jason Pugh at December 2, 2005 12:58 AM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?