This I believe..

This I believe about Digital Journalism
Prior to the digital news revolution, news was brought to consumers in one of two ways, You got the paper delivered in the early morning and read about what happened yesterday, or you watched TV news staple CNN for your national news, and your local news at night to see what happened during the day.
This I believe about Digital
l journalism, it is here to stay. The move to the digital brings many pros and cons to the newsroom, but make no mistake about this format it is this generations version of the news paper, and CNN.

The pros of Journalism’s Reconstruction are plentiful. For one Digital Journalism will continue to work in conjunction with the United States to help keep the government and other authorities honest. Digital Journalism has allowed for more and more news sources not bias toward a government party or watch group to surface. This means there will be less spin on stories that shine a light on either party.
Another benefit to Digital Journalism is the “read it, hear it, and see it” aspect the new journalism format. The example I can use for this is a story I personally experienced this past week, when A hockey player hit his own goalie with a stick, injured him, and he was carried off on a stretcher. Initially the story was presented in a text format, peaking my interest and causing me to say “ I want to see the video of that”. Next available for consumption was the Audio, from the Florida Panthers radio network, then finally someone at NHL.com was able to edit the video, and it was posted a little less than 20 minutes after the story has broke. Speed is another benefit of a digital format, facts, speculation, and personal accounts hit you hard and fast. There are many other benefits to Digital journalism, some I’m sure we have not yet scratched the surface/

Along with the good comes the bad. Citizen journalism is a great example of the bad. Citizen Journalism itself is not bad, it keeps professional journalism on top of it’s game. However It brings up several issues of credibility. For one, people often are unable to separate opinion and fact, or often in the case of citizen journalism opinion is presented as fact, and opposing facts are presented as opinion. Then a slew of readers read this mixed up message and present it as their own fact/opinion spew of information.
Going along with the fact and opinion matter is the issue of who is writing/recording the media. In this day and age pretty much anyone can get on a public forum and spout off how they feel and think, no matter how informed or misinformed they are.

The final downside (This I believe) is the comment section at the end of almost all of the news stories presented on websites. If the story calls for an opinion on something, like a story about a proposed bill, or something in the vein of public opinion, That’s great I say comment away. In the case of a presentation of facts, such as a crime, or something of the sort I say comments are un-needed and only hinder court cases because it brings cases to a public court.
This I believe about Digital Journalism, It is here to stay, and to help bring REAL Fair and Balanced coverage!

"You really can do first quality reporting in smaller news organizations with fewer reporters than you could have a decade ago. You can’t in any sustainable way do it without organizations that pay people to report. What impressed us is that there are so many interesting experiments going on that are trying to make such organizations work."-Schudson Talks back:CJR