<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\x3d12978392\x26blogName\x3dNUJ+New+Media\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dSILVER\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttps://nujnewmedia.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den_GB\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttps://nujnewmedia.blogspot.com/\x26vt\x3d8193525115809785313', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>

25 October 2007

My article in The Journalist and the subsequent controversy

A little article I wrote for the NUJ's magazine, The Journalist, railing at how the philosophy of Web 2.0 is being used to attack professional journalism - reposted on my blog - elicited a response in the Telegraph's blogs.

The magazine contained more articles, drawn from a report I'm involved in preparing on the impact the way some media outlets are using new technology is having on journalism and journalists. Some of the details are here in the Press Gazette blog.

There's been a a little bit of controversy kicked up by this, with some frankly rather odd reactions. Jeff Jarvis tried to be funny and then followed-up with a more considered response. The Torygraph followed up slagging me off with a go at the rest of the articles and then Roy Greenslade made a grand announcement.

So there we go - a nice big debate about the issues, which is a good thing. So what do you think?

Update: here's another one .

More updates:
Some Silicon Valley oiks get their facts wrong (I'm neither particularly old, a hack nor a Limey - there's a clue in my name)
Shane Richmond strikes again
Greenslade needs the weekend, his City University colleague jumps in and, finally so far, we've someone missing the point (seeing as the whole point of the Multimedia Commission is to "equip our members to embrace it").

And the Podcast:
The Guardian interviewed me about this story - and then people discussed what I said, though I'm not sure they really got the point.

Even more, this time some more considered pieces looking at the issues involved:
Journalism and the articulate commons
What is Wrong with the Tech Journalism

and then there's this one:
Hands up those who think Web 2.0 is rubbish!.

Now It’s Your Turn Journalist.

And it goes on:
Let's have a real debate about Web 2.0

Still going: more of the NUJ debate
The NUJ and me: a considered response

Is the Web as weak as its weakest link?
Stand up for kremlinology and groupthink
Night Of The Blunt Nibs
Facing the reality of new media

Another audio appearance from me, this time on late night BBC 5 Live and the subsequent podcast.

And over on our sister site, nujnewmedia.org.uk - Much Ado About Not Very Much

Even more updates:
More Jeff Jarvis:
In olde London
Leaving the union

More Neil McIntosh:
Five things the NUJ could do to engage with the web

NUJ and new media: the trouble is, they just don’t know what’s going on

More Shane Richmond:
Still going: more of the NUJ debate

Paul Bradshaw: The NUJ fuss - now I’m spitting

Joanna Geary: Bedtime reading for the NUJ...

Reportr.net: Does the NUJ understand the internet?

And apparently the Internet's own personal blog

A considered and interesting look at the issue from the University of Bedford's New Media Research Group, contrasting with this from the PBS in the US.

Labels: , , , , ,


Post a Comment

<< Home