Old Media doesn’t get New Media.
Old Media thinks New Media is a bunch of grungy geeks with nothing to say.
In short, Old Media thinks new media should get a haircut and a job.
Journalists and bloggers come from different worlds. Journalists are deadline orientated. Bloggers are instant. Their focus isn’t on getting the story right by deadline, it’s on getting the story now.
To a journalist, bloggers rush to judgement. Worse, the hacks are expected to blog in addition to getting their stories, risking potentially libellous feedback.
That means extra work, and because publishers haven’t figured out how to monetise online yet, it usually means extra unpaid work.
This week, Cowengate showed the difference between the two worlds.
Twitterers trended #picturegate until it was the leading topic worldwide. That sent the story international.
Old Media couldn’t move on. The story wouldn’t die.
In his Friday roundup, Pat Kenny covered Cowengate briefly, then moved on. Yet each time he paused to read emails, there was only one topic.
Matt Cooper finished one segment on the importance of free speech with “Now, on to something serious.”
Of course, New Media doesn’t get Old Media either, but that’s a another story.
Hi Gerard, I completely agree with you, hence the basic question in the post tracked-back above, as to how much of the online outrage was reflected in the print or broadcast media: my impression is that whilst online commentary reflected and often relied upon the print or broadcast media, there was (by and large) very little traffic the other way.
Comments are closed.