In the time before, information was broadcast to the masses and eagerly received. Newspapers had a monopoly on information and audiences and thus lucrative advertising dollars. It was said that owning a newspaper was like owning a license to print money. These newspapers were in control of what stories to print based on what would sell papers and appeal to advertisers. This raises the question, whose interests were the newspapers serving? They were the gatekeepers of information, but these gatekeepers needed a watchdog.
The internet has created a refreshing new domain for news, information, and individual expression. The most popular form of communicating online is the web log or “blog”. They have been referred to as little first amendment machines. Instead of a linear flow of information to the masses, it now flows in a circle where the audience is also the producer. The idea of networked journalism, according to Jeff Jarvis, allows the mainstream media and citizens to work in tandem to create a cooperative news environment where information is checked and balanced. More information is available HERE.
Citizens report real news. They are individual, inventive, and relatively unconstrained. These blogs offer alternative perspectives, appeal to the growing trend of niche interests and audiences and filter the media. They are free to create and free to access. Because of this, they greatly diversify the news and information available. Citizen journalists have been responsible for exposing Trent Lott’s racist remarks and Dan Rather’s Falsification of Bush documents. In this way, citizen journalists monitor the news and offer stories and perspectives the main stream media fail to cover. Citizen journalists also have the distinct advantage of being everywhere and able to upload stories immediately from the source.
The newspapers can’t compete with the growing number and amount of interest in free, online news. The newspapers have been de coupled with their audiences and thus the advertising revenue they rely on so heavily. Online news websites like The Huffington post offer fast and free news and Craigslist offer free classified ad space. For newspapers, the trend seems to be to either go online or die. Though most newspapers have gone at least partially online, they find it difficult to find a profitable business model. It is difficult to charge for news due to the fact that It can be found free elsewhere online. Also, advertising revenue is much less lucrative online. Some solutions have been a reduced paper schedule to cut costs and charging for access to exclusive content online while other sections of the news site remain free.
What are we really losing from the fall of traditional newspapers? Though they offer a great public service, they don’t always serve the public interest. Their heavy reliance on advertising revenue makes them vulnerable to bias and restraint that citizen journalists are unaffected by. Eric Alterman associates newspapers with an expert or elite class and online media with democratic participation. The loss of newspapers could spell the loss of investigative journalism, foreign reporting, and the idea of journalist professionals. However, it could also free the news from the establishment’s idea of exclusivity and the biased filtering of news to whatever is deemed “fit to print”. An example of Eric Alterman’s thoughts on this topic, The New York Time’s online exploits, and a discussion of a popular, free news source The Huffington Post is available HERE.
Although newspaper companies compromised one source where much of the masses obtained their information, I tend to disagree that they had a monopoly on news. In fact, with all of the papers trying to attract new readers the situation was closer to perfect competition. The internet has made survival difficult for newspapers, which, in turn, has led many to go out of business. This trend has left us with fewer papers and less direct competition for the ones that have survived. In fact, individuals who use the internet actually have a less favorable opinion of newspaper accuracy ( http://people-press.org/report/348/internet-news-audience-highly-critical-of-news-organizations).
ReplyDeleteIn your post, you mention that the internet serves as a “watchdog” for newspapers. While this may be true in some cases, it seems like we actually lose some important fundamentals of journalistic principals through the concept of “network journalism.” In the Stovall readings, journalistic conventions are mentioned with a heavy emphasis on balance, objectivity, and fairness. Many of the blogs encourage the opposite of this through the use of flawed statistics and persuasive diction.
I agree that citizens are beginning to report the news themselves through free access, but I question the positive impact of this. Since many citizens are unaware of the basic conventions Stovall mentions, the internet has lead to unprecedented bias. Also, this has lead to the spread of rumors, inaccurate information, and even conspiracy theory. While questioning the powers that be is a good thing, spreading false rumors leads to a misinformed public. For example, during the Presidential election, 12 percent of all Americans thought Obama was a Muslim based on this effect. (http://www.sandiego6.com/news/local/story/12-Percent-of-Americans-Still-Believe-Obama-is/Yt21AhjBdUulVVQgctf_DA.cspx).