md341410@ohio.edu
It is no secret that online journalism is questioned when determining validity. Journalists seem to care more about publishing 20 inaccurate stories a day, rather than one quality story. Is this really true, though? And if it is, has online journalism killed itself before it could even begin?
There are definitely ethical dilemmas with online journalism. People can post whatever they want under the freedom of speech and not be punished (for the most part). What many people do not realize is that there are millions of viewers out there reading this false information, whether they believe they have an audience or not. Blogging is a perfect example of this.
Does blogging qualify as journalism?
According to this article, it does. Blogging is still a way to relay information to the public. By definition, a journalist can be defined as "a person who keeps a journal, diary or other record of daily events."
Although some of the information may be opinionated or false, it is still information that is relayed to the public. Has this killed journalism? No. Has it made online journalism questionable? Yes.
The most important thing to remember when reading online journalism is the source. Wikipedia is a great example. Some view Wikipedia as a legitimate source and others do not, considering the public is allowed to change the content. If you want quality online journalism, stick with a trusted news source.
Inaccuracy in Online Journalism
Now the question becomes, even if I stick with a trusted news source, can the information I read be considered accurate? This article said the public does not trust online journalism sources. They believe there is less accuracy because the information is posted so quickly. There is not time for fact checks (which are essential to ethical journalism).
While this may be true in some instances, for example the 'Adam Lanza' name mix-up, it is not always true and it is almost always corrected. The issue with correcting the mistakes made while posting quickly is that it does not save the victim from immediate harassment. Individuals names have been destroyed because of this unethical journalism. That is why it needs to be important for this generation (the millennial) to change the ways of online journalism and only report information that they know to be correct through reliable sources.
Evolution of Online Journalism
There is no doubt that online journalism will never be a thing of the past. The Internet is here to stay. The important decision now is: How are journalists going to handle this overwhelming pressure to report 24/7 on breaking news? Some of the challenges journalists face can be found on this site, which gives great insight on just how complicated the issues journalists face can be.
I do not believe online journalism has killed traditional journalism, but I do believe it has hurt the public's trust in journalists. A new wave of journalism needs to sweep in and save journalists by producing quality, ethical content. It does not matter how fast a story comes out if the information in the story is incorrect. Creating a story you do not know to be true is called storytelling, and that is not what journalists are set out to do. Journalists are set to report the facts, not create their own story.
No comments:
Post a Comment