Some thoughts for the online journalism students of the world …
One of the cool things about writing for online publications like the Online Journalism Review and American Journalism Review is that I get a lot of comments and e-mails from folks around the world. And probably two or three times a week I’ll get an e-mail from a student studying journalism in Brazil, Sweden, Australia, Switzerland or elsewhere asking for my two cents about the latest developments in the online news industry, whether it’s fat, oversize ads, subscriptions, or Internet ethics.
Instead of carving out an hour here or there, or blowing off a courteous request when I’m swamped with projects, I thought it would make sense to occasionally post my responses to some of the questions I’m asked, given that they frequently overlap.
Today I sent a response to a student at the University of Oregon in Eugene who asked these questions:
Do you agree that online publications still are not seen as credible as more traditional print media?
I don’t agree with that premise. In fact, the most recent study by the Pew (june 2000) suggests just the opposite: that Americans find the online arms of traditional news organizations (CNN.com, USAToday.com, ABCNews.com) more credible than their Old Media counterparts. See:
http://www.people-press.org/media00sec5.htm
What do you think of Salon and Slate?
I think they both do outstanding work. While nearly all of the media attention in the past year has focused on online publications’ profitability, the quality of the journalism on these sites — and a handful of others like TheStreet.com — is superb.
No other publications combine new media savvy (interactivity, community, speed, buzz, contrarian thinking) with old media chops (old-fashioned reliability, accuracy, hitting tight turnarounds when breaking news hits). Will both survive, given the odds against quality content sites? Who knows? But the Web will be poorer if either one perishes.
Did you coin the phrase ‘transaction journalism’?
Yes, in a column for the American Journalism Review in 1997. It’s a trend that bears close scrutiny today as the pressure mounts on online publishers to become profitable at any cost. As online advertising dwindles, managers are looking at other revenue streams, such as e-commerce, sponsored content, business alliances and tiered premium services. That’s all well and good, but the journalists in positions of authority need to make sure that clear lines of demarcation are drawn so that the editorial component of news and content sites is not compromised and the readers aren’t shortchanged.
What can online publications do to boost their credibility?
In many ways, online sites have more going for them than their offline counterparts. The best sites take advantage of the Net’s natural assets: The Internet is nonlinear, letting us call up stories, or drill down to related stories, on our own time frame; it’s instantaneous and convenient, with breaking news only a mouse click away; it offers authentication value, letting reporters point users to source documentation rather than telling them to just trust us; it offers alternative voices (and overlooked stories) not found in the mainstream media; and, most critically, it offers the potential for interactivity and community, so that users can have a conversation with content creators, or with each other, instead of being the recipient of whatever crumbs are handed down by the imperial lords of big media.
I’ve just written a piece on online ethics and credibility that will be published this summer by the Quill magazine. I’ll mention it in this blog, and attach a url, when it’s published. (It’s here.)
J.D. Lasica is a free-lance online journalist and former new media director based in the San Francisco area. Contact JD here.
This entry originally appeared May 21, 2001, on my Manila blog.
JD Lasica, founder of Inside Social Media, is also a fiction author and the co-founder of the cruise discovery engine Cruiseable. See his About page, contact JD or follow him on Twitter.
Leave a Reply