'Journalists' Have Brought A Lot On Themselves

Ever since the days of Watergate, a whole new breed of 'journalist' has been spewed out by universities everywhere, who are all about the 'gottcha' trick question they can twist so they have something outstanding to fill the hole in their paper or tv spot.
There is very little real NEWS reports anymore and the 'reporters' are as much to blame as the politicians.
I started in the newspaper business in 1967, and few of the present 'crop' would last a day under my old publisher. Mind you, back they we tried to provide NEWS and not INFOtainment.

Ahhh, Zalm,

Spoken like someone who needs to get a handle. And a grip.

I don't know how twitter works, i don't have a cell phone

I joined facebook just to give the ndp some support but cant' seem to negotiate that pages and wonder can I work twitter from my laptop? I hate these social media things and they are on every page asking if you want to join-makes me wanna jump off a bridge actually I hate them but if I can get some shots in at these guys....
RR

that mythical golden age of journalism

@jimorsheryl The Myth of Woodstein was fuelled by movies and television and (let's face it) the bar-room bullshitting of journos themselves.

To get an idea of just how bad - unethical, incompetent - political reporting has always been (on average) you might want to have a look at The Boys on the Bus by Timothy Crouse. He covered the reporters in the 1972 presidential election and it's a wonderful read.

Twitter doesn't serve traditional media, btw, it allows both politicians and citizens to do an end-run around old media and talk to each other directly.

For the moment it gives the traditional media repeater sites some free content. Over the longterm, it will make old media irrelevant.

Twit twoo

Disagree!

While I think it's crucial for politicians and parties to use social media effectively, there is nothing quite as effective as a well-researched, pointed letter by a constituent which politician may circulate to relevant experts for advice before preparing a reply.

How do I know the system works? My MP recently helped me apply pressure to Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) to disgorge various benefits Harper preferred to keep in the treasury.

Most recently, a pal and I have sent letters to various authorities in an effort to draw attention to certain gaps we've noticed in Canada's securities regulatory system. See http://www.goldminerpulse.com/blogs/iiroc.php for particulars. Pal plans to post any replies received. In the meantime, both the Canadian Mining Association and Geological Association of Canada have expressed interest in the letter.

Moral: You really can't do anything worth doing in 140 characters.

Agree with Zalm

Rupp, your ad hominem response to Zalm tells me you have no intelligent response to his critique. Or it tells me that Twitter has impaired your ability to counter-argue in anything other than 140-character personal attacks.

What I read in your article is a couple of anecdotes padded by lots of Twitter-is-the-greatest-thing-since-sliced-bread fluff. What annoys me about articles like this is the lack of critical, analytical rigour and balance in assessing the medium. I don't expect McLuhanesque tomes, but I'm troubled by the religious, blind fervour underlying support of such communications tools. In addition to being annoyed, I'm concerned because such fervour can lead to a false sense of political empowerment. I can Tweet my local candidate, even the PM, therefore I'm empowered? If politics were only this simple and easy.

You are correct that Twitter is no longer a lunch report (although I'd say not much more than that), and that it is no longer a one-way communication. What this means, which seems to have escaped you, is that our enemies and bad guys are on the other end of the 2-way street and they too have the tool. If you think candidates and dictators, as opposed to their handlers and spin doctors, are not staffing the Twitter, FB and other social media accounts, you are naive. Yes, there are glimmers of hope in such media, but essentially what we have is a very spun political dialogue moved from the press gallery to Twitter accounts, pruned down to substanceless 140-character missives.

Yes, there is potential for more, but the potential does not mean the actual. I have yet to see the potential realized and I remain cautiously sceptical of anyone who tries to allege otherwise.

Here's my anecdote: Last provincial election, social media played a significant role, especially in the Liberal campaign, yet it was the province's lowest voter turnout of all time.

awaiting the iPhone brain surgery app

Other than that RR, you can learn just about everything you need to know online... including how to use Twitter. At least the basics.

Using it effectively, is another trick altogether... But the best way to learn is to sign up and lurk. Watch how the smart tweeters do it. Start by following @MargaretAtwood, @GreatDismal (William Gibson) and @kady.

And have a look at The Tyee's piece on social media, Crawford lists lots of politicians' handles.

Once you're there you can look at other people's follower lists and find out who you want to hear from -- and talk to.

It all makes way more sense once you're using Twitter. People who don't use it really can't discuss it any meaningful way because it's hard to visualize what someone means unless you've seen it in action.

And you don't need a cellphone unless you want to be mobile. You can use it on an iPod Touch, a tablet, any Internet access device. But the various decks for managing the streams are easiest to use on a computer.

think I will become a twit...

Shannon, I believe I will take your advice on Twitter. I have used it infrequently in the past, but I too have been watching as it morphs into something altogether different...the most interesting thing in your article, I think, is that you point out the potential for a 'virtual scrum' - of citizens. Reporters are essentially meaningless, as every politician knows - but engaged citizens are another matter. Of course, one's enagement has to carry over beyond Twitter.

What part of SOCIAL media don't you guys understand? One of the things social media does very well is the virtual conversation: like all conversation, it has the power to impact individuals profoundly. It doesn't have to be deadly serious, intense conversation to have an effect. Think about chatting with your neighbour, who mentions the fence builder he hired who was on time, on budget, and great to do business with, who then shows you his beautiful fence. If you are looking to build a fence,won't you consider his recomendation over the yellow pages? The fact that your 'chatting' takes place on social media is irrelevant.

I am perfectly sure that I will not change anybody's mind here. But in the quest to remake the country, why are you so quick to malign the potential that Shannon points out? If Twitters users are twits, then perhaps some of you serious, right-thinking folks ought to change that.

The least you could do is to stop denigrating those of us who choose to use these tools in search of a better world.

Ha ha

I find it ironic that Shannon's getting trolled for suggesting that people troll twitter. Read between the lines, you crusty old complainers... with the venom some of you spew on here all too regularly against politicians, contributors, and each other, I'm surprised you aren't following the lead of the article. It's a new venue with more significant people to shit on!

And to scoff at social media, while commenting on The Tyee like, every fucking day? This is social media you twonks! Your comments here are all the more meaningless because they rarely receive a response from your target, unless it's another comment maker or a contributor (sometimes)! And some of you are getting desperate.

And, for the record, social media is far less significant than the hype. The hype is a product of a generation eager to effect change but too steeped in leisure, self-importance, and ingrained materialism to make things actually happen. But so what? You're among them, guys. Me too. We'll get it together after peak oil, peak food, and peak water. Right?

Hypocrites. Logging out!

Snigger

Thanks, Shannon I'll take whatever you're giving away. Especially the name of whatever you'll be logging into to create community next year. If Twitter makes it to 2013, I'll kiss the ground you walk on.

What did you think? That a diarrhoeic character like me would put up with a format that forces me to simplify the sense out of my prose in only 140 characters? I made the mistake of signing up to Facebook to see pictures of my sister's kids. Privacy options not withstanding, my younger siblings, and all their friends, along with everyone who seems to want to befriend me from high school onward, seems to have turned into the most vapid of dweebs. Travellers, doctors, poets, painters, engineers, and a nuclear physicist all seem to have nothing but the maudlin to say.

Is that them, or just the media they're using?

Carry on carrying on - I'm not stopping you.

Most talked about policy on Twitter

Is the Liberal's new policy on helping students with tuition costs.

VivianLea Doubt

I have no issue with the social part of social media. What I do have a problem with are the following presuppositions:

1. That Twitter is necessarily a progressive mode of communication; it empowers citizens and enhances democracy. Or worse, that Twitter is synonymous with democracy.

2. That communications for communications sake is necessarily a great thing.

3. That the medium is necessarily better, more effective than traditional forms of journalism, campaigning and communications.

4. That people who question the merit and value of the medium are out of touch with the times, living in a dark age of traditional, undemocratic modes of communications.

5. That two-way models of PR and communications began with the discovery of Twitter and other social media.

The political left is generally good at the exercise of critical analysis, but I see little to no such analysis when it comes to this new medium. I'm not a neo-Luddite. There are aspects of social media I like, but I don't view it as a democratic Holy Grail.

If we can have a more critical, analytical understanding of the medium, we can better assess issues such as value, success and threats. Right now, all I see is a pack of lemmings accidentally walking off a cliff because their social media-addicted head is too buried into their mobile device.

I would love to see the Tyee find an intelligent media critic who can offer a contrarian opinion on this Holy Grail that is social media. To date, I've seen none.

George Monbiot and this issue

George Monbiot is always worth reading but this column I thought was especially apropos.

Titled : "The need to protect the internet from 'astroturfing' grows ever more urgent"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2011/feb/23/need-to-protect-internet-from-astroturfing

thanks, Frank...

Monbiot IS always worth reading!

Social capital is defined by Harvard University Political Scientist Robert D. Putnam as "the collective value of all social networks (who people know) and the inclinations that arise from these networks to do things for each other (norms of reciprocity)." I want to put forward this idea of social capital, because as Putnam documents, it is drastically declining in North American society, and also, because I think some of you are overlooking the the concept. The bits of unimportant (not newsworthy) things that we post on facebook pages or tweet or blog about can be attempt to regenerate some social capital...of course, in the case of others they might simply be narcissitic. (Did I spell that right?) But those who are attempting to build social capital and those who are simply tweeting their existence are easy to distiguish.
There is nothing that ought to be looked at with an uncritical eye, especially social media. But as I remarked, some of you good folk could help sway the balance.

Thanks Viv

... for an astute and thorough response to my last post. I can always count on social media advocates to avoid the uncomfortable questions. I've been swaying the balance any chance I get, but with little success.

And, a sincere thanks to Frank for that article, which highlights just one of the many threats posed by the medium. This is one author worth bookmarking.