Questions for new media

Why do we pay attention to new media?

I cannot imagine the world without the Internet. In the Web world, I get information, meet friends, and even get rid of stress by watching movies. I do such activities more often online than offline. Going back to the theoretical world, people raise questions about why people welcome the Web-based world and what distinguishes it from traditional media. Several points can be summarized from the readings for this week; new media give people an opportunity to explore the truth and challenge professionals, eventually contributing to democracy. Nevertheless, we need to consider what they really mean.

What is “truth?”

The article, Among the audience, discussed that the new media permits multiple sources of truth as opposed to the old media, which offers just one such source. Does the truth exist beyond the area where the traditional media failed to report? Also, does the number of sources or channels guarantee a “better” truth? Can audiences really sort out what is truth, what is credible and worthwhile, and what is not? Given that we have little trust in the traditional media today, why do we tend to trust new media? Is it because new media gives us an opportunity to participate in the message production and distribution processes? If we do not trust the messages provided by traditional media since news is produced and selected through its institutional processes, do people believe that new media has no such institutional processes?

What is “professionalism?”

As stated in the article, we have competing arguments about blogging. On one hand, blogging is good because it gives everyone a platform on which to express their views. On the other hand, it is bad because unqualified amateurs weaken media professionalism. Is there a concrete definition of “professionalism?” It could be the difference between a professionalist and professional content. For instance, can it be said that professional content is a product that is produced by professionalists? What makes a professionalist professional? Can new media to become a “paper of the record” as traditional media is considered?

What is the “democracy?”

If it is a compelling argument that the Web is really a tool for democracy, then I wonder what democracy is. What are the vital elements of democracy? Is democracy intended to give everyone the opportunity to participate in discussions and express their opinions, or is it restricted to accessibility itself? Also, regarding the persistent discussion on electronic democracy, I have begun to wonder about the extent to which the Internet contributes to the diversification of voices in our political world. Of course, it is a positive development that the Internet enables people to express their opinions; however, if these opinions are forced to represent a homogeneous voice, we may encounter yet another problem. Can we judge accurately whether there are shared prejudices or common knowledge?