News on the web has resulted in bite-sized, almost instantaneous mobile news that society has the pleasure of enjoying. Along the accompaniment of social media, news is now more readily available and more interactive than before.
It is here that the ethics of journalism comes into play. Unlike print, news on the web can avoid being subjected to gatekeeping, editing or eternal demands of a(an) shareholder/advertiser. However, it is my opinion that such news is journalism in its purest form. It is one tell can tell the truth without as much compromise a publishing house would be subjected to. Online journalism has the potential to publish only the truest form of a story.
The world of journalism, especially in countries like Singapore, is tainted by red tape and advertising power. How sure are we that we can believe everything that is published by our newspapers or aired by your networks? Most of the time we can trust that what is published is to shape our perceptions rather than tell us the truth.
The beauty of online journalism is that it is harder to regulate the web and freedom of speech is actually possible. With the help of the Internet, news is now able to return at a more grassroots level. However, that in itself has its drawbacks. Not all online news or citizen journalism is on Assange's level. Grassroots journalism has caused a rise in petty, crude content that really should not be considered news. A good example of this is ST's Stomp.
Stomp is a mockery of journalism. Any monkey can take and upload a picture, but it takes a real journalist to know if a story is important and timely enough to be worthy of becoming news (Straits Times, if you're listening, how can a respected paper associate themselves with and allow such vulgar content?). Stomp is nothing but a place for people seeking 15 minutes of petty fame, indulging in voyeurism. Such crude 'journalism' should not be considered as journalism and published at all.
The Internet has levelled the playing field by giving back the ability to publish news. However, we should hope to see more revolutionary journalism such as Wikileaks rather than tabloid fodder such as content on Stomp.
The world of journalism, especially in countries like Singapore, is tainted by red tape and advertising power. How sure are we that we can believe everything that is published by our newspapers or aired by your networks? Most of the time we can trust that what is published is to shape our perceptions rather than tell us the truth.
The beauty of online journalism is that it is harder to regulate the web and freedom of speech is actually possible. With the help of the Internet, news is now able to return at a more grassroots level. However, that in itself has its drawbacks. Not all online news or citizen journalism is on Assange's level. Grassroots journalism has caused a rise in petty, crude content that really should not be considered news. A good example of this is ST's Stomp.
Stomp is a mockery of journalism. Any monkey can take and upload a picture, but it takes a real journalist to know if a story is important and timely enough to be worthy of becoming news (Straits Times, if you're listening, how can a respected paper associate themselves with and allow such vulgar content?). Stomp is nothing but a place for people seeking 15 minutes of petty fame, indulging in voyeurism. Such crude 'journalism' should not be considered as journalism and published at all.
The Internet has levelled the playing field by giving back the ability to publish news. However, we should hope to see more revolutionary journalism such as Wikileaks rather than tabloid fodder such as content on Stomp.
No comments:
Post a Comment