Way back when journalist used to follow their stories around. They would go out into the world and be detectives, solving the pieces of the puzzles along the way. With this new era of technology, we have the world at our fingertips. Journalists have the power of finding all the information they need on Twitter and other social media websites and also can give out information through these websites. The main concern is whether or not Twitter has helped or destroyed journalism.
In a way Twitter has helped journalism flourish. Even journalists were scared of Twitter when it first came about. Was Twitter going to make their jobs disappear? Quite the contrary, Twitter helped them and made their jobs better. With Twitter it is possible for the news to be ongoing. Journalists could give out news all day long through Twitter. People also fear that the information could be false. But with all the resources out there, good journalists always make sure what they're putting out there isn't false. Most people are very into social media, therefore Twitter and Facebook have become their main source of what is going on in the world.
One thing we have to keep in mind also is that there are still people all around the world that do not use social media. We still have to give them a voice and we still need to get the news to them as well. Journalism has to embrace Twitter and social media but also has to remember everybody else in the world. With this being said, whether you are with Twitter or not, it is very easy to see that people use it everyday and more and more people are voicing their opinions on all types of topics. The world is forever changed.
There's no disputing Twitter's potential. It can be especially helpful at those moments when news breaks and the only people on the scene are eyewitnesses. At such moments these accounts can be a starting point for a news provider's coverage. But newspapers--and readers--also need to recognize the limitations of Twitter. Its posts are short, impressionistic, and not always 100% accurate. And it's no substitute for in-depth coverage of events.
ReplyDelete