Some news organizations have had trouble adapting to the digital world for a few reasons. One reason is because they operate under a broadcast sensibility. They tend to produce discrete bias of centent, finished products meant for passive consumption
Some information and videos I found that are helpful come from this website, http://www.vanderbilt.edu . There is much evidence to support that big organizations and companies are having trouble making the transition from the old, fossilized technology to the newer modern, digital world.
Some researchers find this change to be healthy. For many young researchers this may be chaotic and frusterating. The digital aids to research such as having a wide access to electronic publications places greater stress on the researcher to keep up. Some organizations are having problems trying to keep up, once it has finally made the transition.
This site also helped to support this, http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10100&page=38
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
“At its core the job of working journalists, today, is unchanged.”
ReplyDeleteIn response to this statement I must say that I would have to agree. After looking through our class textbook and skimming different articles on the web, I definitely stand firm when I say that journalism has changed over the past umpteen years, and it will continue to do so. However, just because the way that the information is distributed does not mean that the job of the writer is changed.
After collecting some thoughts from our book and online I have come to think that the ways of portraying the information have changed, however, the job of the writer has not. Which is somewhat strange to me; how could technology change one aspect but not the other? It seems that a free press still remains to be the backbone of our government to this day.
Magazines, books, editorials and periodicals still entertain, inform, educate and bring us the news that we desire every day, so that we the citizens can remain informed. Just because we can now read e-books, or watch certain news clips on YouTube; this does not mean that the job of the journalist has changed. I feel that it merely supports that it is unchanged. If the journalist’s job changed as well as the medium in which it is displayed we would be reading, or not reading something completely different than what we have for over 100 years.
The article that helped me arrive at this decision was from The Los Angeles Times, by writer Stephen Engelberg.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-laborengel6-2009sep06,0,2688358.story
Engelberg is a former print journalist; he is among the few who successfully made the transformation to the Internet. In his article he states that “the work changes, but the job doesn’t.” This not only made me stop and think, but it made me want to read further.
Engelberg speaks of his past, and how he started as a paper boy, then a reporter, then a managing editor of a newspaper. He describes his daily duties of each job and how he performs each task. He still uses the same skills that he was taught 30 years ago, but instead of typing on a type writer and manually editing with a pencil, he uses a computer with a built-in spell check. Instead of writing for a newspaper that gets hand delivered each morning, he simply puts everything up digitally on a computer screen.
Ultimately, this quote from Engelberg is what led me to agree with the statement that the job of a journalist is unchanged.
“The business model is irrevocably changed, and how people receive their news is continuing to evolve. But the value of investigative reporting endures. People remain hungry for news, whether they read it on a computer, a phone or a stack of paper. At its core, the job of the journalist is unchanged: Find out what no one else knows. Make sense of it. And relate the discovery to the lives of ordinary readers.”
Another link that helped support my decision was,
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/fl20090519ww.html
it also talks about the job of a journalist, and how "some things never change."
I agree that the occupation of the journalist is unchanged, even though the ways of accessing their work has. I especially liked the article you posted along with it, and as to how it started to compare with our first post about the technological changes that have taken place over the past decade.
ReplyDelete