Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2011/03/05

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] The future of journalism
From: tedgrant at shaw.ca (tedgrant at shaw.ca)
Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 21:54:21 -0800
References: <8E3F4E13-D152-42B2-BB2D-A88A19E86EFC@mac.com> <848EC5ED5B6E4C499BC6F865A099825C@syneticfeba505> <EAE244AE-E55F-4E1A-BAA8-D9E546923D75@mac.com>

Hi George,
OK My error! As I took your original post in the context against this type 
of " mob journalism!" Unfortunately! :-(

I do have a problem with the main TV networks playing into the hands of the 
big advertising corporations that call the shot in many cases. Most everyday 
folks have no idea, nor concept how the strings are pulled by these 
corporations and the ad revenue available to the TV networks who in many 
cases twist the truth to fit the advertising dollar!

>>>> We had 70,000 people in Madison, WI today; including extremely 
>>>> articulate internationally known speakers;
> and singer songwriters.<<<<<<<

That maybe, but is this a form of democratic change making by the majority 
of people living in WI. who voted during a regular election? Or is it a mass 
group led by songwriters, speakers, youtube and Twitter carrying - using 
people with no understanding of how to run the affairs of a State? Or what 
their actions may or maynot do or show logical reason for a democratic 
change? If that is the case?

>>> What you see at the link IS the future of journalism because they're 
>>> there getting and broadcasting live in real time, archiving the 
>>> material, and making it available.<<<<<

That maybe but are they reporting it as fact (not that the main TV networks 
do at times adding the reporters twist).

But if you have people "reporting" things indicating only one side of a 
story, particularly if it's their side only?  Then that's not telling the 
whole truth of the story. Therefore a huge gathering can be manipulated by 
only hearing the one side. It maybe the best and most truthful, but it seems 
to me there are generally two sides to any situation?

Obviously this is a major problem for the people of the State when it draws 
this size of a crowd / audience.

But if we are talking about "journalism today via the public" as a fact of 
the new way the world will be seen" Then I agree without question as we had 
an incident where a police officer kicked a suspect and his actions were 
caught on a Ipad? Iphone? And of course the officer was charged with assault 
and fired from the force. I have no problem when we see things as they 
happen without any twist of manipulation of what's true. Maybe I'm on track 
with you now????????

And yes I agree whole heartedly we are going to see more and more of this 
kind of coverage by the "masses" that will force the big networks to 
clean-up their act and show the world the truth without the corporate twist.

So am I on-line with you by now? :-)

cheers,
ted



Replies: Reply from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] The future of journalism)
In reply to: Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] The future of journalism)
Message from tedgrant at shaw.ca (tedgrant at shaw.ca) ([Leica] The future of journalism)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] The future of journalism)