The future of journalism
08/07/05 20:54 Filed in: World
London blasts on Flickr and
Wikipedia: By marc
I'm sure this point will be made repeatedly today, but waking up on the Pacific coast of the U.S., I found much better information about today's terrorist attacks in London by looking at the Wikipedia news page and the Flickr photo group than I did by looking at The New York Times and watching CNN. Of course both Flickr and Wikipedia are repeating information and images collected from major news outlets -- many of the Flickr photos are screenshots from television -- but they are both notable for collecting that information from so many sources.
(Via O'Reilly Radar.)
I'm sure this point will be made repeatedly today, but waking up on the Pacific coast of the U.S., I found much better information about today's terrorist attacks in London by looking at the Wikipedia news page and the Flickr photo group than I did by looking at The New York Times and watching CNN. Of course both Flickr and Wikipedia are repeating information and images collected from major news outlets -- many of the Flickr photos are screenshots from television -- but they are both notable for collecting that information from so many sources.
(Via O'Reilly Radar.)
I wanted to post this yesterday, but it didn't really
seem appropriate.
Yesterdays awful events do however show that journalism isn't just for journalists any more. With camera phones and blogs, stories minor and major get covered, from more angles and more throughly than ever before.
This has to be a good thing. Okay many of these unofficial journalists don't have the neutrality that a proper journalist should have, but this again is not a bad thing. If some one has an 'axe to grid' on a story, that biassed report shows one side of the story. Even if you don't agree on that 'side' of the story, it gives you an alternative view point. If really disagree you can probably post your own counter point, or worst case, you just ignore that news feed/web site.
Also all of these unofficial sources make it virtually impossible for a dictatorship to control the media. Look a China, they have probably the most government controlled Internet in the world and yet even with all of these controls blogs showing the plight of dissidents and stories critical of the government still appear. They might get closed down, but they will just pop up somewhere else.
Oh and by the way, the BBC's news coverage of yesterdays events was up to it's normal high standards.
Yesterdays awful events do however show that journalism isn't just for journalists any more. With camera phones and blogs, stories minor and major get covered, from more angles and more throughly than ever before.
This has to be a good thing. Okay many of these unofficial journalists don't have the neutrality that a proper journalist should have, but this again is not a bad thing. If some one has an 'axe to grid' on a story, that biassed report shows one side of the story. Even if you don't agree on that 'side' of the story, it gives you an alternative view point. If really disagree you can probably post your own counter point, or worst case, you just ignore that news feed/web site.
Also all of these unofficial sources make it virtually impossible for a dictatorship to control the media. Look a China, they have probably the most government controlled Internet in the world and yet even with all of these controls blogs showing the plight of dissidents and stories critical of the government still appear. They might get closed down, but they will just pop up somewhere else.
Oh and by the way, the BBC's news coverage of yesterdays events was up to it's normal high standards.
|