Wednesday night's discussion really got me to thinking. We're now submerged in a world of internet media, which, when I look at it, anyone can become a part of. Singers and bands are now found on You Tube and My Space, journalists are made through blogs, and photographers can develop from Flickr. It's almost as if people don't have to try anymore, but appear to get lucky. As Helen said, anyone with an opposable thumb could have taken that video of the flood under the bridge...which makes me question being a journalist. Are the reporters of the world, who enjoy print journalism going to lose out to savvy multimedia journalists? We know the world of print is slowing down while multimedia speeds up, but could print ever completely leave?
For me, I became a journalism major for print, but also on a whim. I have been questioning whether choosing this major was even a good decision, which is obviously another story for another time, but...I went in wanting to write. I like photography, but I don't want to do it. I don't want to make movies. I don't want to edit sound. I like that I get a chance to experiment with these tools in this class because it's a way to break the mold for me, but for those of us striving to work in the print industry, did we make the right choice? Are we going to be surpassed by those who are stronger in multimedia components?
When I surf on the internet at the Boston Globe or even Seacoast online, I don't look at the sound slides & I definitely don't look at movies. To me, that is a waste of time. Personally, I don't even like to fully read articles (yeah, another reason why I question my desire to be in this field), but I like to get news fast. I like to skim articles and see what is happening locally or globally. I don't need all the other wish-wash of videos and sound to fill me in, words can stand alone. In class, the point was raised that these multimedia components are indeed a side for the words, but what if they become the norm? What if videos and sound slides take the place of words?
I use the internet to look for jobs, and to look for schools. I don't really use it for anything else other than doing work. I use IM to stay in touch, and I only use Facebook to keep in touch, otherwise, I wouldn't keep it. I think it's unnecessarily addictive and a waste of time, yet I'm on it all the time. I refuse to use My Space and refuse to go on You Tube unless a friend forces me. I had never heard of Twitter or half the things talked about in class on Wednesday. As of lately, I've been trying to cut back on internet usage. I don't like the idea of basing my life around it, I need to keep my time limited. What happened to picking up a landline and calling a friend and chatting while sitting on your couch? We now use cell phones while driving or at lunch with a friend to chat (and rudely so). What happened to talking in person vs. instant messages. The internet does the work for us. Our words become lost in the giant sea of the net. Will our words in print become lost in the same ways?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Sarah -
Interested by your comment that for you watching video or audio online is a 'waste of time.'
I would argue that if that is the case for you or a large percentage of the population - that just means we are not doing it very well yet.
Multimedia is not a magic bullet. But it is a pathway for newspapers to at least begin their experiments in alternative story-telling media.
As I said I said in class - every delivery medium and technology has a 'sweet spot' at which point content and medium converge into a useful product for readers. Sending 1,000 word stories to a cell phone is not a good mix. Publishing video on newsprint is obviously not a very good mix either. :-)
But - in the future - sending video to your cell phone might be a great combination.
In five years who knows if that will be the next 'killer application' for news organizations. The only way we are going to find out is to keep on trying new things.
Good luck.
Damon
Post a Comment