Fact Mongering Online - New Media Reporting

I have started reading a book edited together by Julia Hobsbawm (Britain's first professor of Public Relations at the London College of Communication). The book contains a number of 'wide-ranging and thought-provoking essays' and explores various issues involving journalists and new media. I hope to keep you up to date on my thoughts regarding the opinions and observations expressed in this book.

In this blog I'll be talking about 'Fact Mongering Online' which was written by Emily Bell. She has worked for The Observer and The Guardian, which included setting up 'mediaguardian.co.uk' in 2000 before becoming 'editor-in-chief of Guardian Unlimited in 2001 which won her a number of awards (including a Webby for Best Newspaper on the World Wide Web).

In this essay, Emily describes the 'limitless connectivity' of the internet as 'the single most empowering publishing technology since Gutenberg invented the printing press'. However, she felt it was vilified 'as a home of the con artist and the paedophile'.

She claims that for many years in the 1990's the internet had a bad image, seen as somewhere that made the 'untalented' rich, and that lead to crashes from sleep deprived 'internet addicts'.

This shows (to some extent) why the transformation from newspaper to news online has been such a gradual process. It has taken a lot of time to establish a sense of trust into what is published on the net.

However, there was a clear plus - the ability to spread news across the world very quickly, but the danger of course was 'Chinese whispers' - the idea that reports would be altered and slowly distance from the true events.

Emily claims that the posting of 'false facts' would affect our perception of truth, and make it difficult for those online to decipher which is which.

With old media, the truth could be assured simply because of the source - a newspaper. Although some would argue that the old media lead to a one-dimensional view, and now access online provides alternate sources and news providers and give us a chance to hear broader opinions and reports.

Emily then speaks about 'electronic news' not necessarily being as dangerous as old media. An electronic reported can get edited and you can apologise for mistakes almost instantly, and while that news is accessible globally, the damage wouldn't be any greater than a printed copy distributed to just one nation, where you have to wait to correct yourself.

Although, the expanding world of the internet means that errors need to be corrected even more urgently because of technology such as RSS feeds, this means that reports become instantly accessible to so many people.

Emily also mentions a phrase for journalists to remember, it was made by journalist Dan Gillmor –

‘There is always someone closer to the story than you.’

Dan Gillmor

And this quote makes many points in my opinion. One suggesting that as journalists we cant rely only on our opinions and what we see, it's always important to speak with those closest to the story so that we get a completely honest and truthful opinion and viewpoint.
Another(that Emily points out) is that with publishing online now being so accessible, somebody(bloggers) with more insight than you will be able to post thier views with more detail, emotion and insight. Often these people will not be driven by money, but simply an enjoyable hoppy.

One question that needs to be asked is whether a lot of 'citizen journalists' are merely reporting the same as professional journalists, or are they really providing an alternate view. Even if they are - is it truthful and backed up by facts and sources? Thier are millions of blogs online, it's difficult for them to stand out, and the fact that many do it as a hobby suggests that the information is not neccessarily deeply sourced. Is this the advantage that the mainstream news reporters have?

Mass communication is the future of news reporting, the likelyhood of incorrect reporting circulating is obviously more common, but the ability to correct it has also become a lot easier.
Looking at ths transfer to focussing on mass communcation and the online world, Emily Bell ends her piece by stating '...there is no reason why truth should be the casualty of this particular revolution'.

Special thanks to Emily Bell and Julia Hobsbawm

Read More

Media Reinventing Journalism

It's become increasing clear that digital media has enabled citizen journalism to become more and more popular. Guardian journalist Emily Bell, wrote a very interesting piece on the 25th February regarding the new connections between the press and the public. She states that the relationship is 'taking on a different, but perhaps even more radical shape than that which we imagined a decade ago'.

In some senses I agree with this statement. However, it lead me to to think about how the various forms of media now so accessible to us has transformed the ways in which we discover and take in news.

With video recording equipment available on most modern phones, it is now so easy for a member of the public to record an event thats happening around them. The most famous example being 9/11 where alot of the more engaging footage is taken from the ground amongst the public.

The power of the people has had a huge impact on how we are now given the news. We have become as interested in opinions as much as we are interested in facts. Whilst some may argue that this helps prevent bias’ journalism, it could also be suggested that it causes the media to sway away from providing us with facts, and only showing basic evidence of certain news stories which therefore lead us into believing we are supporting the right side when in reality we are simply believing what we’re told (whatever it may be).

News is becoming a lot easier to access. It is available to us on various forms of media, ranging from newspapers and radio to television and the internet. This also means that we have a wider choice of how we receive it, meaning that the different forms now need to expand how they present news in order to become more appealing. This has included newspapers creating their own websites which have frequent updates (more than the newspaper itself). This enables readers to express their views through the newspapers by posting onto online forums.
As well as online forums, social networking websites such as facebook and twitter have also provided a voice for the public. An example of this is the huge reaction of disgust and anger towards an article written by Jan Moir concerning the death of Stephen Gately. In the article, she claimed that his ‘strange and lonely’ death was ‘unnatural’ and was a result of him being gay. Twitter users in particular were very vocal at watch she wrote, and the article itself (which was on the mail website) received over 500 comments within hours.
The combined power of the public’s voice eventually lead to an apology from Jan, despite her determination to still stick by the term ‘sleazy’ which she used when describing Gately’s death.

The use of websites such as twitter has expanded to companies such as the BBC, ITV, and sky news to report news as it happens, as well as some connecting their twitter updates to their official website. This gives the public much more frequent news updates, in some cases receiving them as the events are happening.

Another way that the news has advanced is another technique revolved around the public’s view on news. Camera phones and mobile internet means that anybody can now record and report news from wherever they are. This has been shown through public footage of events such as the tsunami, hurricanes and even footage from wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. This sort of footage is now used frequently and in many cases it is preferred to professional filming as it seems to provide a closer, more personal view on the news story as we are seeing it from the viewpoint of somebody involved in the event. Also, at times it shows footage that would otherwise be unavailable for journalists to film. Many members of the public also use cameras to project their views on subjects, posting ‘vlogs’ onto websites such as YouTube. Publicly recorded news has now become such an asset that the BBC has designed a department to specifically focus on these clips through the ‘News generated content department’.

Even though the public now have more control in some areas of journalistic media, we still remain very much under the control of journalists. Many stories are exaggerated and distorted to create fear amongst us to appeal more, and gain bigger interest. The public paranoia also means that we are likely to read further stories that link to what we are told to be afraid of. This can range from crime rates to politics to global warming. The key story that seemed to create this effect of how news is now presented was the 9/11 attacks. We saw both phone-camera footage and public reaction as the planes were colliding. The sheer size of the attack made it a world-wide story, and sparked fear amongst everybody regarding terrorist attacks. It has lead to wars, and fear amongst citizens of not only America but also the United Kingdom. This fear has made us willing to accept any story which allows us to force blame on anyone and anything to feel better about ourselves, and to feel safer. Blame has shifted throughout the last few years including anger aimed at immigration, politicians and celebrities. So the news latches onto these factors and escalates them as they receive the most interest (and in newspaper terms they are what sell copies).

Michael Moore is one person who has shown the extent of damage that the fear created has had on the minds of people. In his documentaries studying the corrupt minds of American’s shows how fear caused the media has escalated so high that in itself, it is creating the problems. In ‘Bowling for Columbine’ he shows how readily available guns are in America, including being given a ‘complimentary gun’ when you open an account with certain banks. At the time of the documentary America had suffered over 11,000 shootings in a year compared to just 68 in the UK. He explored various possibilities of why this was the case, he came to the conclusion that it wasn’t because of bad lifestyles, destroyed marriages or any of the factors that occur in nearly every country. The media in America seems to be the big problem, and now in the UK we can relate to that view to some extent. Instead of covering stories with less of a ‘fear factor’ towards each other (such as Michael Moore suggesting to report the pollution), they are consistently reporting shootings, drowning and any death-related story they can find. When asking a journalist at the scene of a drowning, he admitted he would report a shooting opposed to the drowning of a child. One even stated ‘we’ll wait for events to unfold, and then there will be more to say’. This shows the huge public interest in shootings, because they are in fear. In crime shows, they are shown so many criminals being chased down, which is something that is not completely realistic to many of the crimes that occur. It is expanded and made to look even more dangerous than it usually is. The media does not make an attempt to change this view as it is what creates high ratings. Marilyn Manson tells Moore ‘keep everyone afraid and they’ll consume’.

While the internet has enabled everyone to gain a voice and to speak their opinion, we still remain controlled by journalists and the enormous power that media has. Our desire for celebrity gossip, and numerous rumours and worldwide reports has kept us taking in every word that the news tells us. The creation of global fear and panic through the escalated horror that surrounds us has forced us into a corner. The problem with making our voice heard is that now so many people want to be heard, so there isn’t enough time to read every blog, or watch every public recording. So even though we can now speak our minds as much as we wish, who is listening?

You can read Emily Bell's article on digital media here -http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/feb/25/digital-media-social-media

Read More