Tuesday, September 2, 2014

INTERNET SPAWNS ME-FIRST JOURNALISM

Matt Birt

Courtesy: Twitter

Twenty years ago, online news was a goofy, slow, newfangled notion that, figuratively speaking, still hadn’t been housebroken.  Television and print media were top dog as far as media goes and had been around for decades.  But since then, the internet has gotten itself together and has pushed aside the established industries, becoming the primary method for how people under the age of 50 to get their news.  It is not only supplanting both TV and printed publications in audience share, but it is causing a massive shift in the industry that is putting newspapers out of business and leaving news stations scrambling to reorganize.

The internet is a cheaper, easier way for individuals and companies to share news.  The instantaneous nature of it allows for constant updates unrestrained by time slots or printing schedules.  Platforms like Twitter and Facebook – social media sites that allow users to pick-and-choose what news they see – bring to-the-minute updates to followers on their computers, mobile phones, and tablets.  The biggest attraction these devices and sites have to many users is the customizable news feeds.  Rather than being fed the news that editors or producers felt was worthy enough to make the cut, users can choose what news to take in.  Media outlets like NBC, Cosmopolitan and the Huffington Post have multiple accounts on dedicated to more specific niches like the NFL or regions like the United Kingdom.

Individualized news is a relatively new concept.  Televised news and the stories they covered were up to producers, who could give any amount of time to whatever stories they deemed important.  Newspapers had similar restrictions with word counts and column space where only so much could be squeezed into an edition.  Outlets had to present themselves as generally unbiased onlookers merely passing along information to the general public.  What the internet has done for the news world is create a place with virtually no limits on coverage or content.  Not only can users find stories with angles more suited to themselves (e.g. a Republican following FOX News on Facebook), but people so inclined can actually create their own websites dedicated to what they see as important.

In the tumult of this shuffle, users have gained an increasing sense of self.  The new format –  which allows consumers to pick what they read, when they read it and with whom they share it with –  gives a newfound sense of liberty.  They are no longer shackled to a menu with limited course offerings.  The buffet is now open, and people want all they can get.

Social media users take this philosophy to the next level.  Sites like AOL Instant Messenger and MySpace paved the way for users to express themselves as individuals on services like Instagram and Pinterest.  Not only can members follow who and what they like, they can also generate content they want to fit their own desires.  Before this time, bylines and anchor positions were what people fought for in order share their thoughts with the world.  Now, people can be satisfied with a couple hundred likes on a few thousand followers to share their daily thoughts with. 

The newfound attitudes the public has developed in conjunction with the new technology have proven to be major obstacles for companies to adjust to.  Surveys have shown that news viewers and subscribers have an increasing distrust or dislike for the established media today.  They believe outlets are biased, or don’t do a good job being independent observers in stories anymore.  To some extent they may be right, but they also have different expectations for the journalists and reporters.  They want to hear the news they want, and with today’s oversaturated market of cable news networks and online websites that are constantly growing in number, they can find that.  Before the internet, that pacification didn’t exist and people had to accept it.  Now, they don’t have to accept it and can voice their displeasures with big media more readily.

A pioneer in the online news game is BuzzFeed.  It was created as a hub for viral content and is generally known for short, succinct “listicles”, but has flourished since 2006, becoming one of the biggest news generators online today.  The content offered by its staff range from political and international news articles to entertainment notes and even quizzes.  As of this hour, BuzzFeed’s primary Twitter account had 1,216,802 followers.  Comparably, The New York Times, one of the most well-known and vaunted newspapers in the world, has a daily circulation of 1,865,315 subscribers, 1,133,923 of whom have digital subscriptions.  If a 2006 start-up can attract just as many consumers to its site as an established journalistic icon, then it seems to reason that the age of mass communications as we knew it has morphed almost totally the opposite.  Instead of an industry dominated by businesses that told us what it thought was important, that same industry now depends on giving the consumers what they believe is important, no matter how arcane their expectations or definitions of journalism may seem.

As demographics continue to shift, the notion of a personalized news industry will only continue to take shape.  Journalists who have spent years or decades in the newspaper or television industry will have to adapt to using their employers’ websites to get their content out and utilize social media to continue to be relevant.  The need to be present on social media only reflects the demands of the consumers, who want to know and interact with their news sources rather than just being talked at by them.  It’s up to the journalists to adjust to the users’ demands, however unreasonable they may seem.  Me-first journalism is a new idea that the established industry must conform to, and a refusal to do so may result in the greatest extinction since the dinosaurs.

No comments:

Post a Comment