Joe Gullo

Social media is changing the journalism landscape. Websites like Twitter, Myspace, Facebook, Delicious, StumbleUpon are allowing users to share information at record breaking speeds. I find it fascinating to be able to share a link with all of my Twitter, Facebook and Myspace friends. I see something cool on the web – boom I share it. The same goes with my friends – they see something they think is interesting they share it with everyone. This is a new way of sharing information. Traditionally, we shared information through email, instant messengers and word of mouth. All of those forms were to one individual or may be a couple of people depending on how many people we emailed, instant messaged and or spoke to. However, now with social media we can reach a broad range of people; faster, quicker and easier. This new way of transmitting information is revolutionizing media and journalism field.

There are many questions and even doubts of how “real-time journalism” will affect the field. Over the past couple of years, I have noticed a distinct change in how mainstream media has used broadcasting. When I am watching the news, many of the stories are posted online after they are broadcasted on air. Anchors often guide viewers to go to their website for further information. News agencies are using Twitter and Facebook to bring attention to their stories. They want and hope that you share their stories with your friends. This gains them viewers, listeners and readers.

The real question is, where do citizens come into this process and do they? Journalists are like detectives, curiously trying to find information and get to the bottom of the story. Journalists try to find sources and determine whether the information they have gathered is fact or fiction. This is important because if journalists do not fact check their information – they personally lose credibility and so does the news agency they’re reporting for. In this business, your name and your credibility are everything.

Sometimes I wonder if citizens can produce accurate information and actual facts. Sites like Twitter are surging with information at the moment of breaking news. It’s almost like chaos with hundreds of tweets being sent every minute. How much of this information is accurate? Where is this information coming from? How do we find out what is true and what is not? I think a good example of this is with the Ford Hood incident. I saw people naming the suspect before CNN, MSNBC and other news agencies. It took some cable news stations up to ten to fifteen minutes to get that information out, while Twitter was already discussing who this person was, background information and his role in the army. All the background information that was provided wound up being correct, but we can not guarantee that this will be true in other cases. The media and Twitter both claimed that the gunman was killed – but later reports indicated he was injured and in a coma at a local hospital.

Citizens are an important aspect in journalism and I think we need their accounts to help us write our stories. I think Twitter and other social media websites are an excellent way to gather this information. I think journalists should be the ones to determine the facts from the fiction. I’m afraid that with all of this information being submitted to these sites – we lose a sense of clarity. There is such a thing called too much information.

I think the bigger issues here is that our society thrives on constant updates and needing that information right this second. It’s almost like a subconscious need for information. Television news, newspapers and radio can not keep up with these social media sites because they are too quick. Imagine if television news was like Twitter – it would drive you nuts!  These social media websites have us all wanting up to the minute updates – which is not necessarily a good thing. As a society we want information right this minute and we want this information to be accurate. Unfortunately, you can not have both. You can’t have information updated every minute and expect them to be factual. It takes time to sort out the details and to make sure the information you have is credible. For me, I would much rather wait the extra ten to fifteen minutes and have accurate information then have it right away and have it changed a million times because it was incorrect.

I think the potential is there for real time journalism – we just need a way to organize all the clutter.

What do you think of real time journalism? Leave a comment and or vote on the poll! I am curious what you think and how it may change our field.