Sunday, May 21, 2006
OK, so it’s true, the way in which you can quickly update your webspace and publish offers all sorts of new possibilities for participatory or ‘citizen’ journalism. Instances of this have been well-documented in the blogging literature. But let’s face it, most of the time it’s more likely to be about social networking, impression formation and maintaining a narrative self. We know there are journalist blogs and that’s good, but a far greater proportion operate in a niche, serve a specific affinity, network or recycle information or opinion. The big media-players do, however, seem edgy about how new developments in the digital world could de-stabilise them and mostly this is about the threat of narrowcasting and consumer power. The rush to add new media content isn’t always such a great idea. For example, The Observer’s idea of making the video evidence of the “sex-for-asylum” available doesn’t seem to add much to the story. Do they think it is more credible as a result of this, or what? Wouldn’t it be better to provide add-on information or, where appropriate alternative voices…or interaction?