Media Watch 2013 Style
My New Year's resolution is that I'm going to start blogging more frequently again. That doesn't necessarily mean all of it will be written entries, but video blogs also count toward this tally. As such I will be making more video blogs or video commentaries at my department's newly launched Digital Arts magazine.
But this is a written blog, so what topic has inspired me to write my first blog for 2013? I'm glad you asked! I found two recent and specific incidents to be a fascinating reflection of watching the media in 2013:
A well documented battle between Tesla motors and the New York Times has been raging for the last week. I usually root for my childhood hometown paper The New York Times, but in this case I find myself rooting for my adopted hometown of Silicon Valley. I won't get into every detail of this battle. But I find it fascinating how quickly the back-and-forths, analysis and commentaries on this matter have developed. There is a veritable digital dialogue or chatter that simply would not have been possible a mere 5-10 years ago. The data that Tesla published seems to fairly refute or address most of the points raised in the New York Times article. This level of car and driving data would not have been so readily available to the public years ago. Also, subsequent articles and tests by other media outlets like CNN and CNet seem to side with Tesla on this matter. While I believe the New York Times article raises points that are valid and important to the average consumer who may consider driving or purchasing a Tesla, I'm rooting for Tesla on this matter. Ultimately, I believe it is the general public and consumer who wins in this nuanced and layered battle or dialogue.
While the first incident reflects how new tools, technology and media allow a dialogue, debate and discussion that simply would not have been possible even a few years ago. The second incident is a validation of old media journalism and investigation. Even though image tools like Photoshop and social media platforms like Twitter have made it easier than ever to forge and place propagate fake images and stories, this incident show vividly paints a picture (sorry for the pun) about how it still takes good, old fashion legwork and investigation to prove whether something actually happened or not. Reading this article is almost like following the hero of Stieg Larsson's "Girl with a Dragon Tattoo"as our intrepid reporter physically investigates the angle a photo in question could have been taken. By doing old-school, physical investigation or journalism, he actually proves the photo in question is real. There is something comforting and validating that old-school, real-world footwork is still relevant in validating new media.
And there you have it: The old (physical investigation) checking on the new (digital media) conversely balanced with the new (digital car apps and articles) reporting on the old (automobile industry). That my friends reflects the state of watching the media in 2013.
Kinda neat huh?
But this is a written blog, so what topic has inspired me to write my first blog for 2013? I'm glad you asked! I found two recent and specific incidents to be a fascinating reflection of watching the media in 2013:
A well documented battle between Tesla motors and the New York Times has been raging for the last week. I usually root for my childhood hometown paper The New York Times, but in this case I find myself rooting for my adopted hometown of Silicon Valley. I won't get into every detail of this battle. But I find it fascinating how quickly the back-and-forths, analysis and commentaries on this matter have developed. There is a veritable digital dialogue or chatter that simply would not have been possible a mere 5-10 years ago. The data that Tesla published seems to fairly refute or address most of the points raised in the New York Times article. This level of car and driving data would not have been so readily available to the public years ago. Also, subsequent articles and tests by other media outlets like CNN and CNet seem to side with Tesla on this matter. While I believe the New York Times article raises points that are valid and important to the average consumer who may consider driving or purchasing a Tesla, I'm rooting for Tesla on this matter. Ultimately, I believe it is the general public and consumer who wins in this nuanced and layered battle or dialogue.
While the first incident reflects how new tools, technology and media allow a dialogue, debate and discussion that simply would not have been possible even a few years ago. The second incident is a validation of old media journalism and investigation. Even though image tools like Photoshop and social media platforms like Twitter have made it easier than ever to forge and place propagate fake images and stories, this incident show vividly paints a picture (sorry for the pun) about how it still takes good, old fashion legwork and investigation to prove whether something actually happened or not. Reading this article is almost like following the hero of Stieg Larsson's "Girl with a Dragon Tattoo"as our intrepid reporter physically investigates the angle a photo in question could have been taken. By doing old-school, physical investigation or journalism, he actually proves the photo in question is real. There is something comforting and validating that old-school, real-world footwork is still relevant in validating new media.
And there you have it: The old (physical investigation) checking on the new (digital media) conversely balanced with the new (digital car apps and articles) reporting on the old (automobile industry). That my friends reflects the state of watching the media in 2013.
Kinda neat huh?
posted by Unknown | 7:21 AM
|
1 comments
