The two articles focus on the media revolution and on the emergence (or now prevalence) of new media comsumption/use/model. As a media user, I totally agree the trend/daily situation they describe does happen in my daily life or what I observe online. User-generated or wiki economic model by no means the trend of the new media era, or, the new way to gain information.
However, when reading the critics to Media studies 1.0, and compare it with the speech from a WSJ senior reporter I listened yesterday and all other lectures in my TA class, I'm confused about are they talking about the same thing, or the critics just on certain aspect of mass media research. Is it fair enough to criticize all the traditional values in journalism? (It seems the critics to Media 1.0 focus on news media, but the characteristics or attitudes in Media 2.0 are on all the new media, especially on the user part.) Surely the old media use model no longer capture the new picture, but the other values of the news content might still work in a narrow-defined news field.
It's kind of a mix situation. I gain information, entertainment, personal relationship in using and participating in the user-generated media, but also, I rely on online news website or the news category in the portal sites to get the trustful news. They're all information and significant to me but stull function differently and can't replace each other. In market model, user-generated might be the winner. However, as a journalism student and probably need to work life-time in this area, I'm thinking and worrying about how to combine the strengths of each features in 1.0 and 2.0 era than just criticize each other in journalism or the news(like the e-mails we read on Tuesday is also a myth or misunderstanding in studying new media).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment