Old Media v. New Media
Paul Rolly, a Salt Lake Tribune gossip columnist, is sniping at the Senate Site. Comparing Rolly and the Senate Site would be a terrific case study in old media v. new media.
It would be interesting to examine whether Rolly or the Senate Site is more substantive; which one is more informative; which one is more accurate with facts; which one is better written; which one has better community participation; which one is more transparent in its political leanings, etc.
Opinions?
It would be interesting to examine whether Rolly or the Senate Site is more substantive; which one is more informative; which one is more accurate with facts; which one is better written; which one has better community participation; which one is more transparent in its political leanings, etc.
Opinions?
posted by steve u. at 5/23/2007
Subscribe
7 Comments:
It's funny how in the last few months most of the major papers have scrambled to add commenting systems, links to social networking sites (Reddit, Digg, etc.), RSS feeds and a bevy of other Web 2.0 features in a struggle to maintain relevance in the changing media market. I think this quick transition from old-style website to new-style quasi-blog is going to save their hide in terms of readership, but they'll have to ditch some of their other old-style albatrosses to gain web acceptance.
The first major thing they need to do is open up the archives. Paid archives make sense if there's a significant cost in maintaining them, but when you can serve up some new ads to go along with those history pages, I have to wonder why they wouldn't cash in. Storage and bandwidth are both cheap enough these days that there's no good excuses left.
The next major thing they need to do is start getting local bloggers to write guest columns or editorials. Nothing can buy that kind of buzz from the plugged-in crowd and it would attract out-of-market readers as word spread.
The last thing they need to do is improve their delivery. The papers need to have both unified "everything" feeds as well as feeds for individual categories of news. (Think "RSS Feed of the B Section".) While the Trib has this figured out, the Deseret News struggles with this concept. Also offer the option to get e-mail newsletters with teasers of the article. Dead-tree delivery is going out the window and few folks are going to cough up for a "digital edition" when they can get the same content for free by other means.
Even with all of this, I don't know if newspapers can shrug off their "we know best" attitude in reporting the news, the biggest hurdle they have to clear. Bloggers don't take well to arrogance (though many of them practice it themselves) and the surest way to lose street cred is to act like you know it all.
Excellent points. I'm of the opinion that print media serves an extremely valuable role, and needs to figure out how to adapt. The future of news likely will be a mesh of pros and amateurs developing content.
Since politics is my deal, I notice political reporting. Thomas Burr, Robert Gehrke, Jennifer Toomer-Cook, and several others provide a tremendous service to the public (and to bloggers who link to their articles), because they are dedicated and accurate. If reporters like that didn't have their full-time gigs, I think the dialogue would suffer.
This isn't the first time Rolly has fallen off his chair over the easy give-and-take of the Utah Bloghive. Remember this one? Rolly blogs. He should get it. He doesn't. Why?
Maybe this is why.
Or this.
This?
This.
Maybe this.
Or this.
One of the best thing about New Media is that it promises to hold Old Media accountable to their own Code of Ethics.
The day will come when charlatan reporters who build their careers spreading gossip will be recognized for who they are, and what they do.
A Google search is all it will take.
Or Yahoo. . .
Or MSN . . .
It's been a long time since I commented here. How you been Steve?
In response to you questions:
Which is more substantive? Tie, leaning slightly towards Rolly
Which one is more informative? Senate Site, but close tie.
Which one is more accurate with facts? I will have to Senate Site.
Which one is better written? Rolly wins this one.
Which one has better community participation? Obviously Senate Site.
Which one is more transparent in its political leanings? Another point for Senate Site.
Um, Mom?,
I'm very surprised you follow Rolly so closely. As for the code of ethics, I'll tell you an amazing experience I had. In 2005, House Republican leadership met with the Tribune editorial board. One point we raised was that the paper often isn't very accurate with facts. They asked for specifics. A member of leadership said something to the effect of "everything Rolly writes."
They pointed out that it is a column. "And?" we asked. They pointed out that columns don't have to be accurate.
Huh?
They took several minutes to explain that, indeed, a columnist does not have to be accurate. We asked if some sort of disclaimer would be appropriate. They told us that the writer's picture appearing by the piece designates a column and gives readers fair warning that they can make stuff up. Look for those pictures.
Travis,
Good to hear from you. I am doing great, and I hope that you and your beautiful family are, also. Thanks for playing.
The media world is flat, or at least is getting flatter.
The dinosaurs will have to adapt or perish.
However, before bloggers get too smug, they should acknowledge that the MSM collects the information and reports on it, and bloggers react and respond to it. The MSM is upstream and bloggers are downstream.
Currently, only the MSM has the financial resources to send reporters to legislative committee hearings, city council meetings, etc etc. If the MSM didn't have the resources to cover meetings and press conferences, bloggers would have less to comment on.
It's interesting to think of the ecosystem that is evolving with the addition of new media. I think we are better served because of the balance that comes when people have a chance to respond and offer corrections. Comment sections help and independent bloggers help.
All of it depends on people, paid or unpaid, taking the time to gather facts and offer that information to the audience. It only works if the audience is involved and interested.
Post a Comment
<< Home