News in a New Age
Here’s a conversation between two journalists.
One is 59 years old, the other 27. As the disparity in age suggests the two have very different views on how to find, tell and aggregate news. Hmm. I can read ‘old’ journalist’s mind already. Aggregate? What’s that?
Anyway, here’s the conversation...
Old Journalism: “We ran a story on that release in section two some weeks ago. We can’t run anything else on it. It’s old news.”
New Journalism: “Cool. But people gather their news differently. Let’s put it on our blog, mention it on our web page. That way readers won’t have to hunt to find it.”
Old Journalism: “Stupid politician, they think we have the time to show up and cover them cutting a ribbon on some new building. Where’s the news? I told his PR person that we are not going to be there.
New Journalism: “No way. I asked the Minister’s PR to write about the building why it’s important to the community. I’ll post it on our public blog. Hey, we can get members of the community to comment too. I’ll let readers know by making a quick mention when I tease our online page in tomorrow’s paper. That way when they comment we can see if there is a real story in there. A source tells me that they are questions about safety.
Old Journalism: “Shoot, I’m doing a story on the 50th. Anniversary of
New Journalism: “Hey, I searched the school on Facebook and Linked In and found some alums. Maybe they’ll talk or know someone who will.”
Old Journalism: “Yeah, 300 people commented online about the new aircraft being named for the first time. But that’s not news. What do readers know? We’re not going to do anything more with that.”
New Journalism: “Why not publish a sampling of the comments with a picture of the new plane. Actually, I don’t mind going to cover the story, I can tweet the activities from there. That way you can know if it’s worth sending a crew.
http://www.mangomediacaribbean.com/blog/trackback.cfm?3D3AFC51-3048-2D03-0AD91369DA66F8B0
Judette Coward Puglisi (MSc, Dip IR, BA), Managing Director. Find out more 
I think the issues are way more subtle than you're suggesting here and the divides aren't polarised along the lines of age.
Newspapers all around the world are having difficulty navigating increasingly treacherous waters as Clay Shirky explains here...
<http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2009/03/newspapers-an...;
The real gulf between old and new media isn't in thinking, it's about thinking around the reality that millions of dollars in investments in plant and materials don't make a whit of difference to today's young (and increasingly old) readership.
At some point, it's necessary to let go of the old to embrace the new and that means building the ship that will sink the old one. Very few managers have the will to direct that the new ship be built while the old vessel seems seaworthy.
Sure the ship needs to be rebuilt but I have evidence to prove it is in the thinking as well.
How expensive is it anyway to twitter your headline news? To create a blog, brand it, and drive engagement of your on line readers? To put interactive links on your web site so news can be shared, spread etc. ?
My colleague (32) was in charge of the IT at a local newspapers and she said at one point she noticed a number of unique hits coming from South America, so she went to an editorial meeting armed with ideas about how she could translate these hits into a community, perhaps have some articles translated into Spanish, crosslink with newspapers in the countries frm where the hits were coming, etc.
In that editorial meeting she was faced with blank stares. No one wanted to listen, really listen.I have a myriad of other stories, so I still think it is a difference in thinking.
The old (and you are right that it is not age alone) has to first get to understand the new technology, talk to the younger reporters about social media, implement low cost changes and head to the boardroom armed with a plan of how to tell stories and engage viewers readers on line in ways that go way beyond having a web site.
C News at least seems to be getting it. Are you seeing other media houses doing the same? Do share those stories here?
http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2009/03/newspapers-an...
For some reason it was truncated by the comments software.
Yes, what CNews is doing is commendable and brave. But someone has to do that work and as of this comment, they are doing it for 130 people.
My experience with newsroom management is that someone, at some point, will decide that that much time for that many people isn't worth it.
Unless a real argument can be made that this is an inroad into a new way of reaching their audience, it may well be shut down.
I've had your friend's experience multiplied tenfold.
I wrote this piece for the Guardian in 2007...
http://lyndersaydigital.com/bd/archive/words_files...
and then wrote this proposal, both of which have been ignored...
http://lyndersaydigital.com/bd/archive/words_files...
I now expend my energies doing the only thing I can, which is to build my Internet presence and test these theories in the real world.
The real tragedy of the Titanic wasn't that it crashed into an iceberg, it was in the astonishing series of arrogant errors, careless mistakes and a fundamental misunderstanding of the strength of the vessel that sank the unsinkable.
How will our newspapers, commanding the heights of the local advertising dollar, begin thinking about the unthinkable?