Mainstream media was denounced as irrelevant, having been swept by on-scene reporters and live-tweeters. Many seemed glued to the action, listening to Boston PD scanners and spreading news like wildfire. People claimed this to be the dawning of a new era, the death of outdated cable news. What most confused me about this particular part of the conversation is this doesn't seem like that much of a revelation. We saw it happen in 2011 with the Bid Laden Raid, and coincidentally, the other night I was Skyping with my parents who thought they felt an earthquake and the first thing I did? Take to Twitter to search and see if anyone else was talking about it or had more information (unfortunately, what they felt was the resounding blast from the West Texas explosion.) What I found most interesting is the value we gave small time reporters and the validity we believed them to have, and the speculatory nature of Twitter news. Let me say that while writing this, I am overwhelmed by the number of bases there are to hit, so I am going to hit on the two that are really lingered with me into the morning, and now afternoon.
We were inundated with information, and seemingly took much of it at face value. Reports of suspects names were rampant, and similar to a game of telephone, were passed on and on and on. One suspect in particular was the last name I read before going to sleep, only to awake and read that his identification was entirely wrong. It is incredibly devastating that that student and his family were on the receiving end of the internet junior gumshoes well-intentioned, but ultimately damaging speculation. The aching question I have is what stake do we have in this story?
I don't want to discount the good citizen journalism has done; we cannot deny that we live in a unique world where every person cannot only be a witness, but have the tools at their fingertips to report quickly and to a large audience. But for whom does one report? There seems to be a thin line between reporting for the common good, for the sake of history, and for entertainment value or self-gratification. There were people tweeting their experiences and their observations, but then many more regurgitating this information from their own personal accounts. There were people, at home, in states far away, interpreting the various tweets they were coming across, and submitting that to the public. How many were seeking to pass on relevant information to necessary parties versus how many were simply wanting to be a "part of the action" from their bed? It comes to a point where it is strange and you have to question why people are participating in the conversation.
As I followed the story, I started to feel physically sick as I had flashbacks to footage I had seen of O.J. Simpson's arrest. I was young when the incident happened, so I don't remember much of the news coverage, but this December my parents were watching ESPN's Watch 30 for 30: June 17th, 1994 (here on Netflix.) I remember the hoards of people lining the streets, chasing the vehicles to get a glimpse firsthand, and to this day watching the footage still makes me uncomfortable.
My largest concern in last night's events became are people able to do their jobs? To what extent do we sacrifice or compromise safety for reporting? And most importantly, why? One of my favorite quotes is about care versus curiosity - that when people ask how you are or about something specific in your life, some people care, but most are merely curious. I think it is important that we never lose the ability to take a step back and analyze what stake do we have in this story and what is my role? And what might we, members of the general public, be doing that could jeopardize someone else's ability to fulfill their role? The internet is a boundless forum and we're not sharing information with just our friends, or loved ones, or coworkers - we are sharing it with the world.
With all of this said, social media also served a great purpose in the wake of last night's events: connecting people and furthering dialogue. People across the globe were able to connect and communally process and reflect. It is my hope in coming days that we will continue to talk to one another about our personal observations and thoughts, and the implications of these events. What stake do we have in this story? To dissect and learn from it - to discuss, collaborate, and progress together from where we are now to ensure to the best of our abilities that things are better for the future.
(Post 1 of 2) Very well written, Erikah! Coming from the news media side (even though I'm in the weather department a great majority of the time), I'll say this: Social media has become both a great help, and a great hindrance, when it comes to breaking news.
ReplyDeleteLike you said, there are huge positives: We can all connect with each other in a way that's never been done before. I mean, I can sit in Texas and have dialogue on an issue happening in Boston with someone in, say, England, and it can happen in just a matter of seconds or minutes! And for me on the weather side, it is a HUGE help as well. During severe weather situations, I can have viewers almost instantaneously sending me severe weather reports or images, whether it's hail, wind damage, or otherwise, via Facebook or Twitter, which helps me verify what is showing up on radar and helps me more accurately warn and inform people in severe weather situations. And as far as the spreading of ACCURATE info in general, it can be invaluable in helping get the word out much faster than has ever been possible...
But there's the catch: ACCURATE info. News media sources have taken a lot of flack in recent years for a number of different issues, and most recently it seems to be for the rush of getting something on-air/on Facebook/on Twitter/etc. before getting all the i's dotted and t's crossed... and people definitely have the right to be upset about that. It has become embarrassing how many reputable sources I've seen succumb to this recently... I mean just the other day (I believe it was Wednesday), even the Associated Press jumped early and "confirmed" that a suspect or suspects had been arrested in the Boston case, only to have that been proven completely untrue. Many other national news media sources have fallen victim to being the ones who are rushing to get something posted first instead of getting it totally accurate before posting, but to my knowledge the AP hadn't (or if it has I've never seen it), and when you work in the news media, when the AP confirms something, you go with it, because they have been known for doing their due diligence... and even they jumped the gun on this one. It's definitely one of the main things we focus on at the station I work at...making sure we have all the facts before running with a story. Long story short, people have a right to be frustrated with their news sources on that issue... (continued in Post 2)
(Post 2 of 2) But at the same time, the whole "citizen journalism" movement can be a very real hindrance to not only us in the news media, but to law enforcement and other officials as well. Nowadays, people can get online and pull up virtually any police scanner they want, and within seconds they can be posting on Twitter or on Facebook ANYTHING they hear on the scanner, regardless of whether or not it is true. Like you said, MANY things that were heard on various Boston-area scanners and other sources last night and this morning were almost immediately passed around as facts without any sort of double-checking by folks who were just sitting at home and listening for something interesting (Just a little hint from the news side of things: Just because it's been said on the scanner, that doesn't make it true!). This leads to more and more inaccurate information getting spread around, which leads to more misinformation and leads news sources and law enforcement officials to have to answer questions about misinformation that they didn't even report in the first place. Also, like you mentioned, there are many people out there who get involved in these stories not because they need to, but because they want to for some sort of entertainment or self-gratification or perhaps some other reason. I don't want to totally discount the value of citizen journalism, because there are a lot of people out there who do it in the right way and contribute accurately because they have a real stake in the story... but there seems to be a growing crowd of folks who are, for lack of a better term, "onlookers" just trying to force themselves into a situation where they are not needed.
ReplyDeleteI don't know, I don't want to come off as someone who is ungrateful for the way folks are able to become their own personal mobile photo-journalists nowadays, because it really is an incredible achievement of technology... but if people want to immerse themselves in that role, they have to understand that they need to feel a sense of accountability and make sure what they are spreading is accurate, because in the end, inaccurate reporting helps NO ONE, whether it comes from a verified media source or from just one of their friends.
Bingo Stephen! I agree with so many of your sentiments. I felt it odd that people made such a mockery of mainstream media outlets, and in turn I felt that MSM felt obligated to churn out (incorrect) news at a faster pace, and then the same people would be upset (rightfully so) on false reporting. Darned if you darned if you don't, right?
ReplyDeleteI actually didn't write about this, but I had screenshots of people who were listening to scanners and reported that any law enforcement not at a designated place were reporting to a post, and outright tweeted the name of the post. I could not for the life of me understand why that is something the average person NEEDS to know, I mean this is a live investigation and who knows how many accomplices the suspects might have had who could have seen that and done some real damage at the meeting location? I couldn't believe people had to tweet to remind others that not everything they heard should be put out into social media. Boggling.
In the end, I feel very much in the same boat as you, that people need to realize their responsibility - this isn't Grand Theft Auto, or a Matt Damon movie, or whatever else - this is real life and everything you're doing has some sort of consequence. My thoughts are certainly with the law enforcement and other personnel who not only have to deal with the actual situation, but all of this baggage of keeping people at bay that comes along with it.