We don’t need paid professionals to do retweeting for us. They’re slicing up the attention pie thinner and thinner, giving us retreaded rehashes of warmed over news, all hoping for a bit of attention because the issue is trending. We can leave that to the unpaid, I think.
Retweeting actual news can have a journalistic purpose, but rehashing the tweets about an event as an event in itself, that’s not the way I would like to see things go forward.
As for news, it’s a commodity now. Period. Journalists could be filters for the important bits of information. Background information. Too bad their audience lusts for stories to share with their friends.
Journalism has been under a lot of pressure in the last few years. First bloggers came along who were faster than traditional mediaoutlets. With the rampant succes of social media, things got worse.
Live coverage of events is widely available. Eye witnesses tweet away while events unfold. Yet media outlets keep thinking in terms of articles and edited video segments.
Articles are wonderful. But they are no longer necessary for every event. They were a necessary form for newspapers and news shows but not the free flow, the never-starting, never-ending stream of digital. Sometimes, a quick update is sufficient; other times a collection of videos can do the trick.
via The article as luxury or byproduct « BuzzMachine.
I doubt whether change will come fast to media as it’s not easy to turn an industrially scaled newsmachine around. Yet some people try. Belgian newspaper De Tijd uses storify to tell stories. Roland Legrand and Raphael Cockx seem to be on the cutting edge of new storytelling by newspapers.
It seems like new storytelling is more a matter of individual journalists than of news organizations. Maybe, staying in the vocabulary of mr Jarvis, there is a place for entrepreneurial journalism. Within or outside the organization.
Want more? Go RSS (quotes only)