Communities, Audiences & Online Journalism
The word "community" gets thrown around a lot in the media and
dotcom publishing business. With more channels and websites to choose from,
marketers can't count on any one message hitting a "mass audience"
the way they could during the three-broadcast-network days. As a result,
people with something to sell are targeting smaller groups -- or trying
to convince people they are a group that can be labeled and sold-to.
Step right up for your "Boomer" life insurance, "Gen-X"
automobiles, "Gen-Y" hair gel, "Gen-Z" tattoo parlor,
"patriot" self-waving flags, "devout-believer" firearms...
you name it. This niche-market targeting isn't new, there just seems to
be more of it.
Groups of all kinds have never needed a marketing department to tell them
who they are. People used to share experiences at the corner barbershop,
bowling alley or Moose
Club, or in a political
organization.
What does it take to make a group "a community" in a time of digitally-mediated
communication: Internet-linked computers, e-mail, instant messaging, cell
phones, pagers and other wireless devices?
Some of this new electronic in-group communication is amateur public-relations,
some is more like a family-dinner conversation. Some is do-it-yourself
journalism by one person or by
a scattered group, which may or
may not produce intelligent, well-researched,
fair, honest and sincere reporting. (Yes,
I'm dodging the word "objective.") The writing may be virulently biased,
or just plain sloppy. Some of this self-publishing is computer-assisted,
issue-oriented, advocacy,
partisan "do-it" journalism from one clear point of view; some
takes the attitude of more traditional American "save overt opinions for
the editorial page" journalism. If done well and/or by trained professionals,
it might be part of the "civic
journalism" or "public
journalism" movements among newspaper and TV people who think telling
the news is not enough. (Or it might be part of the muckraking journalistic
tradition of afflicting
the comfortable and comforting the afflicted.)
In almost 20 years online I've seen unlikely "real world" groups
use bulletin boards and other tools -- folk
music clubs with e-mail lists (as well as Friday night concerts), boating
enthusiasts with usenet
discussions (plus weekend rendezvous), swing
dance and contradance fanatics with events-calendars and mailing lists
that let people "dance
gypsy" their way from coast to coast. This online sharing is a
lot like the "news you can use" service journalism that fills
so much of commercial television, but it's more specific to group members'
interests. Journalists themselves have quite the online support-group presence
through an alphabet-soup of organizations and publications from AEJMC
to FAIR, IRE,
OJR, RTNDA
and SPJ to the unabbreviated Poynter
Institute and Nieman Foundation.
That could all be seen as a "virtual community" support system
for the profession. At least having professional journalism resources online
gives anyone with the google.com address
an opportunity to search out ethics
codes and techniques and consider
applying them to their own online publishing.
(I thought I was going to teach a whole journalism course about
this subject, but the semester schedule didn't work
out. Instead, I'm created this page to share some of these thought with my
other classes--online journalism, digital culture, newsgathering
and beat-reporting.)
Here are a few basic questions concerning the makings of a "virtual
community" or a "smart mob" (Both terms popularized by Howard
Rheingold in books by those names.)
- Is the common factor a political issue?
- A neighborhood?
- An ethnic group?
- A profession?
- A hobby?
- A combination?
Maybe the common theme is a possession -- in either sense of the
word: A thing you own (a Volkswagen bus, a Macintosh, a
Palm Pilot) or a case of something "taking over"
each person -- an obsession, passion, devout belief, or some
kind of demon.
More questions:
- Can such communities do their own journalism, or is that just PR?
- Do journalists need to "cover" such groups the way they used
to cover neighborhoods?
- How can a reporter tell real "grass
roots" online communities from "Astroturf"
planted by someone with an agenda?
Shared interests may be enough to introduce people to each other; the shift
from "similar interests" to "community" presumably requires
more dimensions of shared experience, if not direct contact. An online publication
that includes "forum" discussions, meeting announcements and useful
resources may make the difference. There are counterparts in the non-digital
world. Am I part of the same community as the person I've never met who
lives three doors down the hill? Does "community" happen when
we pay our tax bills, or when we meet on the street during a power failure,
or when we sign a petition to get better lights for the school playground?
I think "community membership" looks like the old Ballantine
beer symbol of three linked rings, or the bigger Olympic symbol with more
rings and less overlap: We all belong to a bunch of groups in a myriad of
ways; the rings expand, contract and move into different positions of significance
based on all of the forces and coincidences in our lives. Online "civic
behavior" adds another possibility for linking those rings.
Here are a few more sources and samples of the variety of groups using
online lists, sites and services, with or without real-world meetings. Examples:
Feel free to suggest more!
Topic for class page-design
discussion: Are the underlined blue links in mid-sentence distracting, or
are they entertaining "asides," gratuitous or ironic though they
may be? At least the page is coded so that the external links pop up
in a new window that you can resize, close or drag out of the way without losing your place.
Nov., 2002
weblog version May. 2003
-- Bob Stepno
|
|
© Copyright
2009
Bob Stepno.
Last update:
7/27/09; 3:57:18 AM. |
|
|