When I was in Austin, I would fall asleep each night to bad dreams, prompted by cable television ranting that the world was melting down, principally in Japan. And each morning I would wake up to reporting that described in very careful detail what was actually known, not feared, about the nuclear crisis in Japan.
It's also worth noting that one detractor he quotes drops the term "innovation" in his critique. This is a favorite term of the tech crowd. In tech, "innovative" and "good" are nearly synonymous. Not necessarily so with journalism. The process of journalism - especially the beat system at most major newspapers, embedding reporters in key areas where they can get to know the players, learn how things work and be on the lookout for stories which deserve the attention of the public at large - that is not an innovation. But it continues to yield great journalism.
The tech side of news agencies should be looking for innovative ways to deliver the news, and yes they've dropped the ball in the past. But the interface is not the content, and don't we seek out news for the content?
As I mentioned in some thoughts on the new doc Page One: A Year Inside the New York Times, Carr is one of the few effectively making the case that journalism and technology are not the same thing. Let me again recommend that film for a more in-depth look at how real journalism works and why it achieves something the aggregators never will.
No comments:
Post a Comment