April 9, 2008 at 18:23Journalists and readers do not agree on the future of the media
“Many of us have come to understand that the era of“ We wrote about it, and you read and made a look at it, ”ended. The audience requires a lot more. ” So commented on a recent study of the “common ground” of modern professional journalism with the interests of readers Howard Finberg (Howard Finberg) from the Pointer Institute in Florida.
The study included a survey of a number of editors and readers of traditional regional media outlets regarding their views on modern journalism and, most importantly, on the changes that should happen to it in the future. His results showed that people on both sides of the printing press still agree on the basics: the decisive role of trust in the publication, the quality and depth of work with sources, and their greater openness.
On the basis, however, the similarity of opinions almost ends. So, the audience wants more openness and humanization of journalists: their participation in discussions of articles on websites, their expressions of their own opinion, and views on events. That is stubbornly disputed by professionals educated in the values of objectivity of the author. On the other hand, they consider it unacceptable to admit to public discussion of articles on their resources anonymous commentators, with which the audience fundamentally disagrees.
The authors of the study believe that it will help develop a compromise on the development of online journalism, eliminating the possibility of a conflict between society and the press.
The study included a survey of a number of editors and readers of traditional regional media outlets regarding their views on modern journalism and, most importantly, on the changes that should happen to it in the future. His results showed that people on both sides of the printing press still agree on the basics: the decisive role of trust in the publication, the quality and depth of work with sources, and their greater openness.
On the basis, however, the similarity of opinions almost ends. So, the audience wants more openness and humanization of journalists: their participation in discussions of articles on websites, their expressions of their own opinion, and views on events. That is stubbornly disputed by professionals educated in the values of objectivity of the author. On the other hand, they consider it unacceptable to admit to public discussion of articles on their resources anonymous commentators, with which the audience fundamentally disagrees.
The authors of the study believe that it will help develop a compromise on the development of online journalism, eliminating the possibility of a conflict between society and the press.