SOME people don’t get new media, and think that’s new media’s fault. But the fault, dear brontosaurus, is not in new media, but in yourselves.
I’m not saying that new media is perfect. It has warts and all, and kinks that will be ironed out in time, just as any other medium when it was new. What I find laughable, however, is when people don’t even try it out for themselves, before passing judgment on it. Like people who don’t even watch YouTube, yet claim to be experts on online video. People who dismiss blogging, or think they know all there is to know about it, without having tried blogging themselves.
People who try to make everything fit in their outmoded structures and obsolete world views, not realizing that everything is changing around them. You don’t just have to worry about being incompetent. The real danger is in becoming irrelevant. After all, the dinosaurs were pretty competent and successful, brain size notwithstanding… until something happened, and they failed to adapt.
Anyway, here’s a video taken by INQUIRER.net technology reporter Erwin Oliva of Janet Steele, author and associate professor in journalism at George Washington University, sharing her insights on narrative reporting and its role in the new media age.
Here’s a video taken by INQUIRER.net contributor Candice Montenegro of Janet saying that just because it’s not the inverted pyramid doesn’t mean it’s not good journalism.
And here’s another video from Candice, where Julia talks about narrative vs feature writing.
Dinosaurs supposedly died out some 65 million years ago, but the danger is that some of them might have survived up to now, and are walking among us.
Maybe some of them are even people you know.
May 30th, 2008 at 11:23 am
i agree, joey. there are indeed dinosaurs in newsrooms out there who, as you put it, don’t get it and then dismiss new media as unimportant. which is surprising, given that journalism is perhaps among the few professions that, because of its nature, evolves quickly, now more than ever. the failure to adapt to new technologies and trends is disheartening because, as journalists, we should always be open to new, perhaps more efficient, ways in doing our jobs and in practicing a fundamental principle that has not changed despite the passing of years and the introduction of new technology: ascertaining the accuracy and relevance of the information we disseminate.
cheers,
caloy
May 30th, 2008 at 10:40 am
hi caloy, thanks for visiting and posting your comments.
actually, no, i wasn’t referring to luis teodoro. the fact that he is encouraging journalists to blog and recognizes the power of blogging shows he isn’t a dinosaur. trust me, i would have specifically named him and that whole brouhaha if i was referring to that.
i’m referring to the journalists who in fact want to dismiss blogging and other web 2.0 tools outright, who don’t see how these and other new tools can be adopted and adapted to the needs of journalism. that’s one side of the equation, and i was focusing on that because you will still encounter a lot of resistance to that notion. in fact, let’s not even talk about blogging — some journalists don’t even get the importance of online news publications, period.
the other side of the equation, of course, is that bloggers must also learn to be responsible. bloggers won’t agree with the standards we are trying to uphold, but the difference is that i’m a journalist and a blogger, a journalist who blogs. obviously, as the multimedia editor of inquirer.net, i’m part of mainstream media. i recognize the importance of the rules, and i’m willing to play by them. but these rules also have to be examined and modified as needed to take into account new developments.
it’s a delicate balancing act, championing something new without falling prey to the weaknesses of the new medium and some of its practitioners. just like any tool, you have to use it well. i’m saying don’t dismiss the tool just because of the way some people have used it.
the same thing happened when newspapers first went online. some old school journalists thought the internet would just be a fad and that it would never be “real” journalism. now we see print publications closing left and right, and just surviving as online publications. the same skepticism greeted broadcast journalists when tv was a new medium, and we’ll see this cycle repeated again and again. it’s just that the battlefield how now moved on to web 2.0.
cheers!
May 30th, 2008 at 9:57 am
an addendum, joey:
contrary to what you said that journalism’s dinosaurs do not embrace new media, luis teodoro in fact urged journalists to blog, although, by his own reckoning, if only to “set an example” for bloggers. that may be a contentious point but you have to agree with the premise and context of the suggestion: that far too many blogs irresponsibly publish information (or crap). that teodoro thought journalists should teach bloggers how to responsibly handle these information perhaps betrayed his bias for his profession. then again, who else can do that sort of thing?
which brings me to another point: bloggers should not take offense when journalists teach or show them a lesson or two in journalism. if they do, then they should stop claiming that what they do is the “new journalism.”
cheers,
caloy
May 30th, 2008 at 9:45 am
hi joey,
are you referring to the luis teodoro brouhaha on new media and old media? i suspect you are. and if indeed you are referring to teodoro, you and other practitioners of new media might have misread what he wrote about blogging and journalism. i don’t think he dismissed new media and i don’t think he does not embrace new media. (for one, he does have a website/blog.)
anyway, when this debate erupted, a part of me thought: could the denizens of new media purposely (and misleadingly) insisted that the old media hands like teodoro are dismissing new media in order to bloat their (new media) significance and relevance? is teodoro being depicted as afraid/fearful of new media so that those in new media could feel good about themselves? but that’s just me.
as far as i’m concerned, there is no debate on the relevance of new media and old media. in fact, there shouldn’t even be such a classification. new media (online journalism, blogging, etc.) is nothing but an innovation — a technological step, if i may — in media and journalism that is no different than television when it was first introduced decades ago. and as we know, television did not divide media — it strengthened it.
but i have to point out that many practitioners of present-day new media (mostly bloggers who think they are changing the journalism landscape not by adopting or improving but ditching journalism practices and standards) tend to be arrogant and self-important. if they continue with this attitude, they — not old-timers like teodoro — will fade into obsolescence.
think about it: as newspapers get more digital and migrate to the Internet, who do you think they hire first? the hotshot, smart-aleck blogger or the competent journalist/editor?
cheers,
caloy
May 28th, 2008 at 2:10 am
hi jim, thanks for visiting and posting a comment.
yup, the problem with some people is that they’re afraid to try anything new, and then try to rationalize their fear by dismissing these innovations as unimportant.
cheers!