2
The true test of the democratic value of the internet is not how many more people can sound-off, but how many more people can contemplate and engage in thoughtful debate. The democratization of media through the internet is a good theory, however, the overall anecdotal results suggest more people are simply talking to more like-minded people. Few, if any citizen posts on the internet are for thoughtful debate and in fact, the nature of the medium itself has produced a lot of partisan yell ing, sarcasm, and abuse. Thus, the hope and optimism for the internet to continue to raise awareness of worthy causes is only a partial understanding of its influence, because it is also contributing to a deeper segregation in our society. The limitations for traditional media are well documented, and the live or die struggles we are experiencing now are proof only the strongest survive. There is evidence too that this is a time for a wider recognition of the limitations of the internet as a medium. Its most striking limitation is also its greatest strength -- and that is the l ow, to no barrier for entry. On one hand, anyone can speak their mind, on the other hand, this freedom begets a degree of mindlessness. The most integral parts of communication with one another have been built on objectivity, empathy, and reasoning. The democratization claims for the internet are incompatible, and at best naive without consideration of the deep divides the internet creates.  As a book publisher, I am saddened to see a greater number of non-fiction books conceding objectivity and honesty to partisan rankling. Some of this is due to the pitfalls of a media market driven toward targeting niche audiences: sell knitting books to knitters, conservative books to conservatives, liberal books to liberals. Objectivity, once the crown jewel of most respected media companies, continues to erode and all of us, providers and consumers of media, are responsible for it. A shift toward mindful professional standards in the  ACHIEVING OBJECTIVITY IN THE MEDIA AND INTERNET January 15, 2010  The true test of the democratic value of the internet is not how many more people can sound-off, but how many more people can contemplate and engage in thoughtful debate.  To comment or subscribe please click here. KENNETH KALES

Achieving Objectivity in the Media and Internet

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Achieving Objectivity in the Media and Internet

8/9/2019 Achieving Objectivity in the Media and Internet

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/achieving-objectivity-in-the-media-and-internet 1/1

The true test of the democratic value of the internet is not how many more

people can sound-off, but how many more people can contemplate and

engage in thoughtful debate.

The democratization of media through the internet is a good theory,

however, the overall anecdotal results suggest more people are simply

talking to more like-minded people. Few, if any citizen posts on the

internet are for thoughtful debate and in fact, the nature of the medium

itself has produced a lot of partisan yelling, sarcasm, and abuse.

Thus, the hope and optimism for the internet to continue to raise

awareness of worthy causes is only a partial understanding of its

influence, because it is also contributing to a deeper segregation in our

society.

The limitations for traditional media are well documented, and the live or

die struggles we are experiencing now are proof only the strongest

survive. There is evidence too that this is a time for a wider recognition of

the limitations of the internet as a medium. Its most striking limitation is

also its greatest strength -- and that is the low, to no barrier for entry. On

one hand, anyone can speak their mind, on the other hand, this freedom

begets a degree of mindlessness.

The most integral parts of communication with one another have been

built on objectivity, empathy, and reasoning. The democratization claims

for the internet are incompatible, and at best naive without consideration

of the deep divides the internet creates.

 As a book publisher, I am saddened to see a greater number of non-fiction

books conceding objectivity and honesty to partisan rankling. Some ofthis is due to the pitfalls of a media market driven toward targeting niche

audiences: sell knitting books to knitters, conservative books to

conservatives, liberal books to liberals.

Objectivity, once the crown jewel of most respected media companies,

continues to erode and all of us, providers and consumers of media, are

responsible for it. A shift toward mindful professional standards in the

media with requires acknowledging and competing with the avalanche of

under-sourced and under-resourced democratized citizens of the internet.

This single differentiation on self-controlled objectivity is central to books

and other traditional media marketing themselves back to their vital place

as purveyors dedicated to revealing truth.

It is fine that self-aggrandizing internet communications exists, just

recognize it as such. Recognize that much of it is no more a

democratization of free speech than screaming "fire" in a crowded theater

is.

 ACHIEVING OBJECTIVITY IN THE MEDIA AND

INTERNET  January 15, 2010

 The true test of the democratic

value of the internet is not how

many more people can sound-off,

but how many more people can

contemplate and engage in

thoughtful debate.

 To comment or subscribe please

click here.

KENNETH KALES

Next >< Previous