Comments on: News Consumption by Voting http://citmedia.org/blog/2007/09/12/news-consumption-by-voting/ Sun, 23 Aug 2009 21:40:20 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Seth Finkelstein http://citmedia.org/blog/2007/09/12/news-consumption-by-voting/comment-page-1/#comment-1958 Seth Finkelstein Thu, 13 Sep 2007 17:17:51 +0000 http://citmedia.org/blog/2007/09/12/news-consumption-by-voting/#comment-1958 Karl, you should know by now that by definition I'd lose in any dispute against an A-lister. Whatever I found, the A-lister just has to say "I didn't mean that, I meant ..." (that's the nice version, the nasty version is to make a personal attack). Part of the problem is that the business of web-evangelism requires both populist rhetoric, and sellng the audience to big business. So there can be a lot of fancy footwork going back and forth between those contradictory ideas. The answer to your question is something I've been harping on for a while - <em>news</em> is NOT just a matter of <em>information</em> being "out there". There's a whole complicated social/political structure to which information gets heard, and new technology bring new exploitation. Much of the rhetoric of "Web 2.0" is in fact extremely unfavorable to being <b>correct</b> in favor of being <b>popular</b>.. Karl, you should know by now that by definition I’d lose in any dispute against an A-lister. Whatever I found, the A-lister just has to say “I didn’t mean that, I meant …” (that’s the nice version, the nasty version is to make a personal attack).

Part of the problem is that the business of web-evangelism requires both populist rhetoric, and sellng the audience to big business. So there can be a lot of fancy footwork going back and forth between those contradictory ideas.

The answer to your question is something I’ve been harping on for a while – news is NOT just a matter of information being “out there”. There’s a whole complicated social/political structure to which information gets heard, and new technology bring new exploitation. Much of the rhetoric of “Web 2.0″ is in fact extremely unfavorable to being correct in favor of being popular..

]]> By: Karl http://citmedia.org/blog/2007/09/12/news-consumption-by-voting/comment-page-1/#comment-1957 Karl Thu, 13 Sep 2007 12:39:46 +0000 http://citmedia.org/blog/2007/09/12/news-consumption-by-voting/#comment-1957 Seth, I challenge you to find wherever Dan said that editors would no longer serve a function in the future. I agree it's a flawed survey, but I'm happy they did it. Here's the bigger question - in this world of news when you want it, why does 1 in 3 Americans Still Believe Saddam Involved in 9/11? Blaming traditional media isn't the answer. We have choices now. http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003638490&imw=Ywww.mercurynews.com/search/ci_6859681?IADID=Search-www.mercurynews.com-www.mercurynews.com&nclick_check=1 Seth, I challenge you to find wherever Dan said that editors would no longer serve a function in the future.

I agree it’s a flawed survey, but I’m happy they did it.

Here’s the bigger question – in this world of news when you want it, why does 1 in 3 Americans Still Believe Saddam Involved in 9/11? Blaming traditional media isn’t the answer. We have choices now.

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003638490&imw=Ywww.mercurynews.com/search/ci_6859681?IADID=Search-www.mercurynews.com-www.mercurynews.com&nclick_check=1

]]> By: Rollo http://citmedia.org/blog/2007/09/12/news-consumption-by-voting/comment-page-1/#comment-1956 Rollo Thu, 13 Sep 2007 02:13:21 +0000 http://citmedia.org/blog/2007/09/12/news-consumption-by-voting/#comment-1956 There's a discussion about this question over at TechCrunch today. Go add your thoughts (mine's #6: I'm worried Seth is right but hopeful Dan's optimism will prevail). http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/09/12/does-social-media-make-you-dumb/ There’s a discussion about this question over at TechCrunch today. Go add your thoughts (mine’s #6: I’m worried Seth is right but hopeful Dan’s optimism will prevail).

http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/09/12/does-social-media-make-you-dumb/

]]> By: Is This a Surprise? : The Last Podcast http://citmedia.org/blog/2007/09/12/news-consumption-by-voting/comment-page-1/#comment-1955 Is This a Surprise? : The Last Podcast Wed, 12 Sep 2007 23:02:02 +0000 http://citmedia.org/blog/2007/09/12/news-consumption-by-voting/#comment-1955 [...] At least some people are now criticizing this study. See: Mathew Ingram, James Robertson, and Dan Gillmor. Nick Carr, however, should know better. --- Related Posts [...] [...] At least some people are now criticizing this study. See: Mathew Ingram, James Robertson, and Dan Gillmor. Nick Carr, however, should know better. — Related Posts [...]

]]> By: Seth Finkelstein http://citmedia.org/blog/2007/09/12/news-consumption-by-voting/comment-page-1/#comment-1954 Seth Finkelstein Wed, 12 Sep 2007 22:36:42 +0000 http://citmedia.org/blog/2007/09/12/news-consumption-by-voting/#comment-1954 "We are not heading to a world with no editors." Really? It's not a read-write participartory-emergent unconversation? There's, like, <em>gasp</em> <b>GATEKEEPERS</b>??? Except the new ones are even more interested in entertainment than the old ones? Who would have thought! "The people formerly known as informed" http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2007/09/the_people_form.php "When you replace professional editors with a crowd or a social network, you actually end up accelerating the dumbing-down of news. News becomes a stream of junk-food-like morsels. The people formerly known as the audience may turn out to be the people formerly known as informed." But remember, that's where the <b>money</b> is. That's where the <b>attention</b> is. Anyone else, well, They Don't Get It. :-( “We are not heading to a world with no editors.”

Really? It’s not a read-write participartory-emergent unconversation?

There’s, like, gasp GATEKEEPERS???

Except the new ones are even more interested in entertainment than the old ones?

Who would have thought!

“The people formerly known as informed”
http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2007/09/the_people_form.php

“When you replace professional editors with a crowd or a social network, you actually end up accelerating the dumbing-down of news. News becomes a stream of junk-food-like morsels. The people formerly known as the audience may turn out to be the people formerly known as informed.”

But remember, that’s where the money is. That’s where the attention is. Anyone else, well, They Don’t Get It. :-(

]]> By: News flash: Digg headlines not "real" news » mathewingram.com/media http://citmedia.org/blog/2007/09/12/news-consumption-by-voting/comment-page-1/#comment-1953 News flash: Digg headlines not "real" news » mathewingram.com/media Wed, 12 Sep 2007 21:25:34 +0000 http://citmedia.org/blog/2007/09/12/news-consumption-by-voting/#comment-1953 [...] But people like Nick are happy to do so anyway. Dan Gillmor has some brief thoughts on the topic here, and there’s a good in-depth look at the implications of the study at SFGate as well. digg, [...] [...] But people like Nick are happy to do so anyway. Dan Gillmor has some brief thoughts on the topic here, and there’s a good in-depth look at the implications of the study at SFGate as well. digg, [...]

]]> By: News flash: Digg headlines not "real" news » mathewingram.com/work http://citmedia.org/blog/2007/09/12/news-consumption-by-voting/comment-page-1/#comment-1952 News flash: Digg headlines not "real" news » mathewingram.com/work Wed, 12 Sep 2007 21:21:45 +0000 http://citmedia.org/blog/2007/09/12/news-consumption-by-voting/#comment-1952 [...] But people like Nick are happy to do so anyway. Dan Gillmor has some brief thoughts on the topic here, and there’s a good in-depth look at the implications of the study at SFGate as well. Digg, [...] [...] But people like Nick are happy to do so anyway. Dan Gillmor has some brief thoughts on the topic here, and there’s a good in-depth look at the implications of the study at SFGate as well. Digg, [...]

]]>