I have been watching the development of the Wikipedia entry on the VT shootings over the last week. Surely this is collaboration at it's best. It is more up to date and maybe more accurate than my local newspaper. I certainly read reports in Wikipedia that were not reported or reported incorrectly in the newspaper.
It makes me wonder about what is around the corner. What will be the state of journalism and the future of journalists when we can use our tv's in a collaborative wiki format?
It is now imperative that we teach our students how to critique, synthesise and analyse, and they must learn how to ask the hard questions.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
It's so interesting what you said about journalism. My Canadian Literature class held a conference about the definition of digital literature - its meaning, its implications, its definitions, its future.
Personally, I believe that the next generation will watch television in a "YouTube" format and that programming will be a choice available at the click of a button (or link, for that matter). Journalism will probably be something done by every human with a computer. Take, for example, the blog "Baghdad Burning" of an anonymous individual in Baghdad who keeps the rest of the world up to date about day-to-day events in the city that would never be listed on any broadcasting network.
This may pose some problems, such as, who is reliable, what do we believe? But that happens today as well. Are some broadcasting networks not biased? Hopefully we'll have more to gain than to lose.
Hi bristena
I believe you are on to it with the youtube model, and I'm sure it's not too far away.
I think this kind of broadcasting will be more reliable in the long run, as the reporter and editor bias and a paper's political stand will not affect the news report.
Post a Comment