The twitterisation of news is one of those
new-age, digital concepts. Social media in general has left a lasting impact on
journalism, but the twitter movement has been significant. Not only do news
outlets post breaking stories, but crowd source information, research
investigative pieces and sell themselves as professionals through personal
accounts.
Described by journalist Julie Posetti
(2013) as “public text messaging on steroids”, twitter provides a platform
where news can be delivered instantly to the world in 140 characters or less. Almost
every news organization and journalist has (or should have) an existence in the
twittersphere.
It compliments the instantaneous nature of
journalism and reaches out to a mass audience. And in true journalism fashion
the news is short, sharp and bite (or should I say byte) sized.
Guardian Media Group CEO Andrew Miller
gives us the low down on the ways in which twitter has benefitted his news
organization. He explains that twitter has helped The Guardian in an enormous
way, with over 10% of the newspapers traffic coming from social media. He
explains that the heart of journalism is in breaking news, and “twitter is the
fastest way to do this.”
Take the story of NSA whistleblower Edward
Snowden for instance. This story “really broke for us on twitter” Miller
explains. It took over an hour for this story to reach other breaking news
stations.
This video gives Mr Millers’ overview on
just how important twitter is for news media.
Basically, if you’re not on twitter, you’re
doing it wrong!
One effect of this ‘twitterisation’ is an
increase of a concept aptly titled co-creation. While co-creation sounds like a
wonderful, happy concept, as a future journalist, I’m a little skeptical. While
twitter acts as a fantastic resource to increase a journalists network, it has
lead to a rise in citizen journalism. I’m not totally against citizen
journalism; there lies great opportunity for journalists and citizen
journalists to create beautiful news together. But seeing as the future of the
industry is already a little problematic, I can’t help but wonder if sites such
as twitter rule out the need for journalists?
Take the Hudson River plane crash for
example. This was one of the biggest news stories of 2009. The pilot declared
an emergency after a bird strike, (this is apparently where birds fly into ones
plane) but continued to successfully land the plane into the Hudson River,
saving all 155 passengers.
This story was broken on twitter by John
Citizen, or in this case, Janis Krums, a witness who was travelling on a nearby
ferry.
Image source: http://www.fundraisingcounsel.com/fundraising-blog/fundraising-social-media/five-social-media-tips-for-nonprofits/
Of course it was picked up by news
organisations within minutes and retweeted by millions, but one of the biggest
stories of the year was published not by a journalist but a citizen. Obviously
this is because due to the nature of the event there was no journalist at the
site to provide coverage, and the accounts and photos supplied by witnesses
were used to piece together the story. But it really leaves you wondering, where
do journalists stand? Will micro-blogs such as twitter leave us redundant as ‘professionals’
or will we always need journalists to verify stories and give that sense of authority
that the public trust? For my sake I hope so!
No comments :
Post a Comment