5 ms·

It didn't occur to the author that social media is the new journalism.

a3n 10y ago
Shouldn't that be spelled New Journalism?
dtparr 10y ago
What does this mean, exactly? I get social media is how the results of journalism get distributed, but what funds the journalism itself if traditional news/media companies go out of business? Is twitter or facebook going to fund investigative journalists? What's the business model for a company looking to pay people to research and write about things if 'social media is the new journalism'? Do we rely on non-profits/donations? Or are you proposing we'll get all our news in a decentralized manner via people posting what's going on around them?
jdietrich 10y ago
"You do not, in my city, run into bloggers or so-called citizen journalists at city hall, or in the courthouse hallways, or in the bars where police officers gather. You don't see them consistently nurturing and then pressing sources. You don't see them holding institutions accountable on a daily basis. Why? Because high-end journalism is a profession. It requires daily full-time commitment by trained men and women who return to the same beats day in and day out. Reporting was the hardest and in some ways most gratifying job I ever had. I am offended to think that anyone, anywhere believes that American monoliths as insulated, self-preserving and self-justifying as police departments, school systems, legislatures and chief executives can be held to gathered facts by amateurs, pursuing the task without compensation, training, or for that matter, sufficient training to make public officials even care who it is they're lying to or who they're withholding information from. Indeed, the very phrase 'citizen journalist' strikes my ear as Orwellian. A neighbour who is a good listener and cares about people is a good neighbour. He is not, in any sense, a 'citizen social worker'. Just as the neighbour with a garden hose and good intentions is not a 'citizen firefighter'. To say so is a heedless insult to trained social workers and firefighters." - David Simon https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Llnbzq7b4Ww https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Llnbzq7b4Ww
- DrScump 10y ago
  "You do not, in my city, run into bloggers or so-called citizen journalists at city hall, or in the courthouse hallways, or in the bars where police officers gather..." But this is 2017, and most cities are one-newspaper towns, generally exhibiting close, mutually-protective relationships between commercial media and government decision-makers. I've seen major papers outright lie about events in city council meetings and legislation (for two examples) when they thought nobody would hold them accountable. I've seen written accounts of speakers and audiences at city council meetings that the reporter didn't even attend. (And if you search online, you may well find independent reporting "gadfly" groups or individuals you didn't know existed -- the local commercial media sure wouldn't tell you. Nextdoor can also be useful, but the signal-to-noise ratio is often low.) One example process: local governments dish out taxpayer money to pseudo-independent "service organizations". Those organizations use part of these funds to buy advertising in local media and on public transit agencies. Those media, in turn, do flowery reporting on those local governments and soft-pedal police violence and union corruption, resulting in situations like "The Riders" in the Oakland Police Department[0]. This is too often the circle of modern urban "journalism". And that's without even addressing the issue of predatory corporate behavior by publishers themselves[1]. The broader point: modern, for-profit media are exactly that -- for-profit businesses. Their fiduciary duty is to maximize shareholder value. Objectivity and honesty are orthogonal to short- and medium-term profit. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allen_v._City_of_Oakland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allen_v._City_of_Oakland [1] http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/05.29.97/spanish-press-9722.html http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/05.29.97/spanish-pre...
  - throwanem 10y ago
    His town is my town, too. The city council does what it damn well pleases, most of the time, but what check there is on the corruption that pervades our local government comes mostly from the Sun. On the other hand, despite his cogent comments on the value of professional reporting, he now occupies himself as a television writer and producer. Make of that what you will.
    - 10y ago
TorKlingberg 10y ago
Social media completely fails at factual reporting. It would be futile to point out falsehoods on, say, the frontpage of Reddit, because the lsit would grow too fast. Twitter, Facebook or Tumblr are no better, just people reposting what they agree with and nobody to hold responsible.

a3n 10y ago

Shouldn't that be spelled New Journalism?

What does this mean, exactly? I get social media is how the results of journalism get distributed, but what funds the journalism itself if traditional news/media companies go out of business? Is twitter or facebook going to fund investigative journalists? What's the business model for a company looking to pay people to research and write about things if 'social media is the new journalism'? Do we rely on non-profits/donations? Or are you proposing we'll get all our news in a decentralized manner via people posting what's going on around them?

jdietrich 10y ago

"You do not, in my city, run into bloggers or so-called citizen journalists at city hall, or in the courthouse hallways, or in the bars where police officers gather. You don't see them consistently nurturing and then pressing sources. You don't see them holding institutions accountable on a daily basis. Why? Because high-end journalism is a profession. It requires daily full-time commitment by trained men and women who return to the same beats day in and day out. Reporting was the hardest and in some ways most gratifying job I ever had. I am offended to think that anyone, anywhere believes that American monoliths as insulated, self-preserving and self-justifying as police departments, school systems, legislatures and chief executives can be held to gathered facts by amateurs, pursuing the task without compensation, training, or for that matter, sufficient training to make public officials even care who it is they're lying to or who they're withholding information from. Indeed, the very phrase 'citizen journalist' strikes my ear as Orwellian. A neighbour who is a good listener and cares about people is a good neighbour. He is not, in any sense, a 'citizen social worker'. Just as the neighbour with a garden hose and good intentions is not a 'citizen firefighter'. To say so is a heedless insult to trained social workers and firefighters." - David Simon https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Llnbzq7b4Ww https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Llnbzq7b4Ww

DrScump 10y ago
"You do not, in my city, run into bloggers or so-called citizen journalists at city hall, or in the courthouse hallways, or in the bars where police officers gather..." But this is 2017, and most cities are one-newspaper towns, generally exhibiting close, mutually-protective relationships between commercial media and government decision-makers. I've seen major papers outright lie about events in city council meetings and legislation (for two examples) when they thought nobody would hold them accountable. I've seen written accounts of speakers and audiences at city council meetings that the reporter didn't even attend. (And if you search online, you may well find independent reporting "gadfly" groups or individuals you didn't know existed -- the local commercial media sure wouldn't tell you. Nextdoor can also be useful, but the signal-to-noise ratio is often low.) One example process: local governments dish out taxpayer money to pseudo-independent "service organizations". Those organizations use part of these funds to buy advertising in local media and on public transit agencies. Those media, in turn, do flowery reporting on those local governments and soft-pedal police violence and union corruption, resulting in situations like "The Riders" in the Oakland Police Department[0]. This is too often the circle of modern urban "journalism". And that's without even addressing the issue of predatory corporate behavior by publishers themselves[1]. The broader point: modern, for-profit media are exactly that -- for-profit businesses. Their fiduciary duty is to maximize shareholder value. Objectivity and honesty are orthogonal to short- and medium-term profit. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allen_v._City_of_Oakland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allen_v._City_of_Oakland [1] http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/05.29.97/spanish-press-9722.html http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/05.29.97/spanish-pre...
- throwanem 10y ago
  His town is my town, too. The city council does what it damn well pleases, most of the time, but what check there is on the corruption that pervades our local government comes mostly from the Sun. On the other hand, despite his cogent comments on the value of professional reporting, he now occupies himself as a television writer and producer. Make of that what you will.
  - 10y ago

TorKlingberg 10y ago

Social media completely fails at factual reporting. It would be futile to point out falsehoods on, say, the frontpage of Reddit, because the lsit would grow too fast. Twitter, Facebook or Tumblr are no better, just people reposting what they agree with and nobody to hold responsible.